Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1314543
| From | Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC] locking/mutexes: don't spin on owner when wait list is not NULL. |
| Date | 2016-01-21 22:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qTuXM-2zU-19@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <qTjSG-3ll-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Thu, 2016-01-21 at 17:29 +0800, Ding Tianhong wrote: > > diff --git a/kernel/locking/mutex.c b/kernel/locking/mutex.c > index 0551c21..596b341 100644 > --- a/kernel/locking/mutex.c > +++ b/kernel/locking/mutex.c > @@ -256,7 +256,7 @@ static inline int mutex_can_spin_on_owner(struct mutex *lock) > struct task_struct *owner; > int retval = 1; > > - if (need_resched()) > + if (need_resched() || atomic_read(&lock->count) == -1) > return 0; > One concern I have is this change will eliminate any optimistic spinning as long as there is a waiter. Is there a middle ground that we can allow only one spinner if there are waiters? In other words, we allow spinning when atomic_read(&lock->count) == -1 but there is no one on the osq lock that queue up the spinners (i.e. no other process doing optimistic spinning). This could allow a bit of spinning without starving out the waiters. Tim
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH RFC] locking/mutexes: don't spin on owner when wait list is not NULL. Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com> - 2016-01-21 10:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH RFC] locking/mutexes: don't spin on owner when wait list is not NULL. Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com> - 2016-01-21 22:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH RFC] locking/mutexes: don't spin on owner when wait list is not NULL. Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-01-22 03:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH RFC] locking/mutexes: don't spin on owner when wait list is not NULL. "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-01-22 04:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH RFC] locking/mutexes: don't spin on owner when wait list is not NULL. "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> - 2016-01-22 03:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH RFC] locking/mutexes: don't spin on owner when wait list is not NULL. Waiman Long <waiman.long@hpe.com> - 2016-01-22 00:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH RFC] locking/mutexes: don't spin on owner when wait list is not NULL. Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-01-22 07:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH RFC] locking/mutexes: don't spin on owner when wait list is not NULL. Waiman Long <waiman.long@hpe.com> - 2016-01-22 14:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH RFC] locking/mutexes: don't spin on owner when wait list is not NULL. Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-01-22 17:50 +0100
[PATCH] locking/mutex: Allow next waiter lockless wakeup Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2016-01-25 03:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH] locking/mutex: Allow next waiter lockless wakeup Waiman Long <waiman.long@hpe.com> - 2016-01-26 00:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH RFC] locking/mutexes: don't spin on owner when wait list is not NULL. Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-01-22 10:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH RFC] locking/mutexes: don't spin on owner when wait list is not NULL. Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com> - 2016-01-22 11:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH RFC] locking/mutexes: don't spin on owner when wait list is not NULL. Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-01-22 12:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH RFC] locking/mutexes: don't spin on owner when wait list is not NULL. Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-01-22 12:00 +0100
Re: [PATCH RFC] locking/mutexes: don't spin on owner when wait list is not NULL. Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-01-22 12:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH RFC] locking/mutexes: don't spin on owner when wait list is not NULL. Waiman Long <waiman.long@hpe.com> - 2016-01-22 15:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH RFC] locking/mutexes: don't spin on owner when wait list is not NULL. Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com> - 2016-01-24 09:10 +0100
Re: [PATCH RFC] locking/mutexes: don't spin on owner when wait list is not NULL. Waiman Long <waiman.long@hpe.com> - 2016-01-22 14:50 +0100
csiph-web