lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jan]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH -v5][RFC]: mutex: implement adaptive spinning
On Wed, 7 Jan 2009 22:37:40 +0100
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote:

> > But we can do that with __get_user(thread_info->cpu) (very unlikely page
> > fault protection due to the possibility of CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC) and
> > then validating the cpu. It it's in range, we can use it and verify
> > whether cpu_rq(cpu)->curr has that thread_info.
> >
> > So we can do all that locklessly and optimistically, just going back and
> > verifying the results later. This is why "thread_info" is actually a
> > better thing to use than "task_struct" - we can look up the cpu in it with
> > a simple dereference. We knew the pointer _used_ to be valid, so in any
> > normal situation, it will never page fault (and if you have
> > CONFIG_DEBUG_PAGEALLOC and hit a very unlucky race, then performance isn't
> > your concern anyway: we just need to make the page fault be non-lethal ;)
>
> The problem with probe_kernel_address() is that it does lots of
> operations around the access in the hot path (set_fs, pagefault_disable etc.),
> so i'm not sure that's a good idea.

probe_kernel_address() isn't tooooo bad - a few reads and writes into
the task_struct and thread_struct. And we're on the slow, contended
path here anyway..


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-01-07 22:39    [W:0.220 / U:1.096 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site