[lkml]   [2019]   [Apr]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH v4 07/16] locking/rwsem: Implement lock handoff to prevent lock starvation
On 04/16/2019 04:26 PM, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 04/16/2019 10:12 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 01:22:50PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>>> +/*
>>> + * The typical HZ value is either 250 or 1000. So set the minimum waiting
>>> + * time to 4ms in the wait queue before initiating the handoff protocol.
>>> + */
>>> +#define RWSEM_WAIT_TIMEOUT (HZ/250)
>> That seems equally unfortunate. For HZ=100 that results in 0ms, and for
>> HZ=300 that results in 3 1/3-rd ms.
>> (and this is not considering Alpha,ARM and MIPS, who all have various
>> other 'creative' HZ values)
>> In general aiming for sub 10ms timing using jiffies seems 'optimistic'.
> I see your point. I will change it to use sched_clock() instead.

Thinking about it again. I think I will just change its definition to
"((HZ + 249)/250)" for now to make sure that it is at least 1. The
handoff waiting period isn't as important in the overall scheme. Using
sched_clock() will definitely have a higher overhead than reading
jiffies. I want to minimize delay before the waiter can attempt to steal
the lock in the slowpath. That is the main reason I use this simple
scheme. We can certain change it later on if we choose to, but I would
like to focus on other more important things first.


 \ /
  Last update: 2019-04-16 23:08    [W:0.111 / U:25.964 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site