Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1165506 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2015-06-15 21:40 +0200 |
| Last post | 2015-06-16 03:10 +0200 |
| Articles | 2 — 2 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [PATCH 2/4] locking/rtmutex: Use cmp-cmpxchg Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> - 2015-06-15 21:40 +0200
Re: [PATCH 2/4] locking/rtmutex: Use cmp-cmpxchg Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com> - 2015-06-16 03:10 +0200
| From | Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-06-15 21:40 +0200 |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/4] locking/rtmutex: Use cmp-cmpxchg |
| Message-ID | <pBIoG-4yI-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
On Mon, 2015-06-15 at 11:34 -0700, Jason Low wrote: > The CCAS technique was typically used in the slow paths for those > other locks, where the chance of the operation returning false is > higher. That is true. Although I really want to use it in patch 4, I guess I could move the check in there, and thus avoid having it in the fastpath. Thanks, Davidlohr -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2015-06-16 03:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <pBNy2-3LE-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #1165506 |
On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 12:37 PM, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net> wrote: > On Mon, 2015-06-15 at 11:34 -0700, Jason Low wrote: >> The CCAS technique was typically used in the slow paths for those >> other locks, where the chance of the operation returning false is >> higher. > > That is true. Although I really want to use it in patch 4, I guess I > could move the check in there, and thus avoid having it in the fastpath. I agree, that way, we only have the extra check in cases where it is beneficial, like in the optimistic spin loop. Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel
csiph-web