lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Mar]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH 0/7] locking: qspinlock

* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:

> Hi Waiman,
>
> I promised you this series a number of days ago; sorry for the delay
> I've been somewhat unwell :/
>
> That said, these few patches start with a (hopefully) simple and
> correct form of the queue spinlock, and then gradually build upon
> it, explaining each optimization as we go.
>
> Having these optimizations as separate patches helps twofold;
> firstly it makes one aware of which exact optimizations were done,
> and secondly it allows one to proove or disprove any one step;
> seeing how they should be mostly identity transforms.
>
> The resulting code is near to what you posted I think; however it
> has one atomic op less in the pending wait-acquire case for NR_CPUS
> != huge. It also doesn't do lock stealing; its still perfectly fair
> afaict.
>
> Have I missed any tricks from your code?

Waiman, you indicated in the other thread that these look good to you,
right? If so then I can queue them up so that they form a base for
further work.

It would be nice to have per patch performance measurements though ...
this split-up structure really enables that rather nicely.

Thanks,

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-03-11 13:01    [W:0.142 / U:0.192 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site