[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAEXW_YQY64XdhuxYuwqBkeYQFKTt4yDyHwUfBip4hf+A83mL-g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2023 15:19:23 -0500
From: Joel Fernandes <joel@...lfernandes.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Wei Wang <wvw@...gle.com>,
Midas Chien <midaschieh@...gle.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Anton Vorontsov <anton@...msg.org>,
"Guilherme G. Piccoli" <gpiccoli@...lia.com>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>, kernel-team@...roid.com,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pstore: Revert pmsg_lock back to a normal mutex
On Tue, Mar 7, 2023 at 9:09 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Mar 03, 2023 at 06:11:34PM +0000, Joel Fernandes wrote:
> > What makes the rtmutex spin logic different from normal mutex in this
> > scenario, so that rtmutex wants to do that but normal ones dont?
>
> Regular mutex uses osq 'lock' to serialize waiters and only the top
> spinner gets to spin on the mutex itself, this greatly reduces the
> contention on the mutex.
>
> OSQ is FIFO, which is not what RT-mutex needs.
Got it, so basically OSQ ensures fairness as its FIFO and also reduces
lock contention because I am guessing the OSQ-spinners are spinning on
a per-spinner MCS node (that per-CPU optimistic_spin_node it appears).
This makes perfect sense now, thank you Peter!!!
- Joel
Powered by blists - more mailing lists