From: Jason Low <jason.low2@hpe.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: jason.low2@hpe.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
imre.deak@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hpe.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
terry.rudd@hpe.com, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] locking/mutex: Prevent lock starvation when spinning is enabled
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2016 15:07:52 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1470866872.17361.14.camel@j-VirtualBox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1470854648.17361.9.camel@j-VirtualBox>
On Wed, 2016-08-10 at 11:44 -0700, Jason Low wrote:
> Imre reported an issue where threads are getting starved when trying
> to acquire a mutex. Threads acquiring a mutex can get arbitrarily delayed
> sleeping on a mutex because other threads can continually steal the lock
> in the fastpath and/or through optimistic spinning.
>
> Waiman has developed patches that allow waiters to return to optimistic
> spinning, thus reducing the probability that starvation occurs. However,
> Imre still sees this starvation problem in the workloads when optimistic
> spinning is disabled.
>
> This patch adds an additional boolean to the mutex that gets used in
> the CONFIG_SMP && !CONFIG_MUTEX_SPIN_ON_OWNER cases. The flag signifies
> whether or not other threads need to yield to a waiter and gets set
> when a waiter spends too much time waiting for the mutex. The threshold
> is currently set to 16 wakeups, and once the wakeup threshold is exceeded,
> other threads must yield to the top waiter. The flag gets cleared
> immediately after the top waiter acquires the mutex.
Just noticed that the patch title mentions "when spinning is enabled".
The title should really be:
"locking/mutex: Prevent lock starvation when spinning is disabled"
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-10 22:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-10 18:44 [PATCH v2] locking/mutex: Prevent lock starvation when spinning is enabled Jason Low
2016-08-10 20:00 ` kbuild test robot
2016-08-10 20:01 ` kbuild test robot
2016-08-16 20:19 ` Jason Low
2016-08-10 22:07 ` Jason Low [this message]
2016-08-11 2:30 ` Jason Low
2016-08-11 15:40 ` Waiman Long
2016-08-16 19:44 ` Jason Low
2016-08-17 1:41 ` Wanpeng Li
2016-08-17 18:30 ` Jason Low
2016-08-18 0:38 ` Wanpeng Li
2016-08-18 14:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-18 15:22 ` Waiman Long
2016-08-18 14:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-18 15:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-18 15:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1470866872.17361.14.camel@j-VirtualBox \
--to=jason.low2@hpe.com \
--cc=Waiman.Long@hpe.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=imre.deak@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@us.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=terry.rudd@hpe.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.