[lkml]   [2005]   [May]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: spinaphore conceptual draft
    Chris Friesen <> writes:

    > Andi Kleen wrote:
    >> On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 08:52:13AM -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
    >>>What about rdtsc?
    >> It fails the reliable and monotonic test on AMD;
    > tsc goes backwards on AMD? Under what circumstances (I'm curious,
    > since I'm running one...)

    It is not synchronized between CPUs and slowly drifts and can even run
    at completely different frequencies there when you use powernow! on a
    MP system.

    It can be used reliably when you only do deltas on same CPU
    and correct for the changing frequency. However then you run
    into other problems, like it being quite slow on Intel.

    I suspect any attempt to use time stamps in locks is a bad
    idea because of this.

    Note that at least on modern Intel systems you can just use
    MONITOR/MWAIT which is much more efficient, if you are willing to eat
    the fake wakeups due to the cache line padding they use.

    My impression is that the aggressive bus access avoidance the
    original poster was trying to implement is not that useful
    on modern systems anyways which have fast busses. Also
    it is not even clear it even saves anything; after all the
    CPU will always snoop cache accesses for all cache lines
    and polling for the EXCLUSIVE transition of the local cache line
    is probably either free or very cheap.

    Optimizing for the congested case is always a bad idea anyways; in
    case lock congestion is a problem it is better to fix the lock. And
    when you have a really congested lock that for some reason cannot be
    fixed then using some kind of queued lock (which also gives you
    fairness on NUMA) is probably a better idea. But again you should
    really fix the the lock instead, everything else is the wrong answer.

    BTW Getting the fairness on the backoff scheme right would have been
    probably a major problem.

    The thing that seems to tickle CPU vendors much more is to avoid
    wasting CPU time on SMT or on Hypervisors while spinning. That can be
    all done with much simpler hints (like rep ; nop).


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-05-30 19:49    [W:0.022 / U:5.748 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site