[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230424084259.txfDjYNV@linutronix.de>
Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2023 10:42:59 +0200
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Crystal Wood <swood@...hat.com>,
John Keeping <john@...anate.com>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking/rtmutex: Do the trylock-slowpath with
DEBUG_RT_MUTEXES enabled.
On 2023-04-21 19:58:52 [+0200], Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 28 2023 at 18:54, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> > On 2023-03-22 17:27:21 [+0100], To Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >> > Aside of that for CONFIG_DEBUG_RT_MUTEXES=y builds it flushes on every
> >> > lock operation whether the lock is contended or not.
> >>
> >> For mutex & ww_mutex operations. rwsem is not affected by
> >> CONFIG_DEBUG_RT_MUTEXES. As for mutex it could be mitigated by invoking
> >> try_to_take_rt_mutex() before blk_flush_plug().
>
> > I haven't observed anything in the ww-mutex path so we can ignore it or
> > do something similar to this.
>
> Yay for consistency !
>
> I fixed it up to the below.
you fixed the ww-mutex path and did with the debug path what I did in
the follow-up patch. Let me fold this then and drop the other one.
> Thanks,
>
> tglx
Sebastian
Powered by blists - more mailing lists