lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Sep]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 for 4.14 1/3] membarrier: Provide register expedited private command
On Fri, Sep 29, 2017 at 01:01:12AM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> That's fine. If a user is not bound to a subset of CPUs, they could
> also cause disturbances with other syscalls and faults, taking locks,
> causing tlb flushes and IPIs and things.

So on the big SGI class machines we've had trouble with
for_each_cpu() loops before, and IIRC the biggest Power box is not too
far from that 1-2K CPUs IIRC.

Bouncing that lock across the machine is *painful*, I have vague
memories of cases where the lock ping-pong was most the time spend.

But only Power needs this, all the other architectures are fine with the
lockless approach for MEMBAR_EXPEDITED_PRIVATE.

The ISYNC variant of the same however appears to want TIF flags or
something to aid a number of archs, the rq->lock will not help there.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-09-28 17:52    [W:0.100 / U:4.792 seconds]
©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site