Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1506043
| From | Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/5] cpu_relax: introduce yield, remove lowlatency |
| Date | 2016-10-21 17:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <suJCi-7mB-25@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <suGEq-509-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <suJsC-73K-27@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
On 10/21/2016 04:57 PM, David Miller wrote: > From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> > Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 13:58:53 +0200 > >> For spinning loops people did often use barrier() or cpu_relax(). >> For most architectures cpu_relax and barrier are the same, but on >> some architectures cpu_relax can add some latency. For example on s390 >> cpu_relax gives up the time slice to the hypervisor. On power cpu_relax >> tries to give some of the CPU to the neighbor threads. To reduce the >> latency another variant cpu_relax_lowlatency was introduced. Before this >> is used in more and more places, lets revert the logic of provide a new >> function cpu_relax_yield that can spend some time and for s390 yields >> the guest CPU. > > Sparc64, fwiw, behaves similarly to powerpc. As sparc currently defines cpu_relax_lowlatency to cpu_relax, this patch set should be a no-op then for sparc, correct? My intend was that cpu_relax should not add a huge latency but can certainly push some cpu power to hardware threads of the same core. This seems to be the case for sparc/power and some arc variants. Christian
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
[PATCH/RFC 0/5] cpu_relax: introduce yield, remove lowlatency Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> - 2016-10-21 14:10 +0200
[PATCH 1/5] processor.h: introduce cpu_relax_yield Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> - 2016-10-21 14:10 +0200
[PATCH 4/5] Remove cpu_relax_lowlatency users Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> - 2016-10-21 14:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/5] cpu_relax: introduce yield, remove lowlatency Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-10-21 14:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/5] cpu_relax: introduce yield, remove lowlatency David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> - 2016-10-21 17:00 +0200
Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/5] cpu_relax: introduce yield, remove lowlatency Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com> - 2016-10-21 17:10 +0200
Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/5] cpu_relax: introduce yield, remove lowlatency David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> - 2016-10-21 17:20 +0200
csiph-web