Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1465662
| From | Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH v2] locking/mutex: Prevent lock starvation when spinning is enabled |
| Date | 2016-08-19 02:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <s7Gat-6Ui-11@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <s4GJI-j6-57@gated-at.bofh.it> <s7wut-WK-21@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 04:27:35PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:44:08AM -0700, Jason Low wrote:
> > @@ -556,8 +604,12 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
> > * other waiters. We only attempt the xchg if the count is
> > * non-negative in order to avoid unnecessary xchg operations:
> > */
> > - if (atomic_read(&lock->count) >= 0 &&
> > + if ((!need_yield_to_waiter(lock) || wakeups > 1) &&
> > + atomic_read(&lock->count) >= 0 &&
> > (atomic_xchg_acquire(&lock->count, -1) == 1))
> > + if (wakeups > 1)
> > + clear_yield_to_waiter(lock);
> > +
> > break;
> >
> > /*
>
> There's some { } gone missing there...
>
> Also, I think I'll change it to avoid that extra wakeups > 1 condition..
Also, its broken, even if we should not trylock, we should still very
much xchg(-1) to mark the lock as having waiters.
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH v2] locking/mutex: Prevent lock starvation when spinning is enabled Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-08-18 16:30 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] locking/mutex: Prevent lock starvation when spinning is enabled Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-08-19 02:50 +0200
Re: [PATCH v2] locking/mutex: Prevent lock starvation when spinning is enabled Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-08-19 02:50 +0200
csiph-web