From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>
Cc: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>, Boqun Feng <boqun@kernel.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Yafang Shao <laoar.shao@gmail.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 next 3/9] locking/osq_lock: Set prev_cpu=0 instead of locked=1
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2026 15:15:10 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20260915131510.GD4121620@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260915131314.GB2009045@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Tue, Sep 15, 2026 at 03:13:15PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 07, 2026 at 09:41:27AM +0100, David Laight wrote:
>
> > + /*
> > + * If 'prev' tries to remove itself from the list before we write
> > + * a new value to prev->next it will spin in osq_wait_next().
> > + */
>
> This comment pertains to what?
>
> > + /* Invalidate prev_cpu matching osq_unlock() */
> > + node->prev = 0;
>
> I'm confused, osq_unlock() does no such thing.
The next patch adds a comment stating that this store is not strictly
needed. And only serves to ensure node->prev ends up being 0 in all
paths.
That comment *should* obviously have been here. Also, I would *much*
rather have this store at the top, next to node->next = NULL; That is
much saner.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-15 13:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 54+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-07 8:41 [PATCH v4 next 0/9] locking/osq_lock: Optimisations to osq_lock code David Laight
2026-09-07 8:41 ` [PATCH v4 next 1/9] locking/osq_lock: Add some comments about how it works David Laight
2026-09-09 14:57 ` Waiman Long
2026-09-07 8:41 ` [PATCH v4 next 2/9] locking/osq_lock: Save the cpu number for 'prev' not the node address David Laight
2026-09-09 17:36 ` Waiman Long
2026-09-15 8:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-09-15 10:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-09-15 11:11 ` David Laight
2026-09-15 17:27 ` Waiman Long
2026-11-06 10:25 ` [tip: locking/core] locking/osq: Save the CPU number for 'prev', " tip-bot2 for David Laight
2026-09-07 8:41 ` [PATCH v4 next 3/9] locking/osq_lock: Set prev_cpu=0 instead of locked=1 David Laight
2026-09-09 18:01 ` Waiman Long
2026-09-09 18:52 ` David Laight
2026-09-14 12:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-09-14 13:10 ` David Laight
2026-09-14 12:03 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-09-14 13:08 ` David Laight
2026-09-15 8:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-09-15 10:14 ` David Laight
2026-09-15 8:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-09-15 10:20 ` David Laight
2026-09-15 10:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-09-15 13:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-09-15 13:15 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2026-09-15 13:55 ` David Laight
2026-09-15 14:01 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-09-15 17:47 ` David Laight
2026-09-16 8:08 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-11-06 10:25 ` [tip: locking/core] locking/osq: " tip-bot2 for David Laight
2026-09-07 8:41 ` [PATCH v4 next 4/9] locking/osq_lock: Delete 'fast path' code from osq_unlock() David Laight
2026-09-15 14:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-09-16 10:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2026-09-07 8:41 ` [PATCH v4 next 5/9] locking/osq_lock: Avoid writing to node->next in the osq_lock() fast path David Laight
2026-09-07 8:41 ` [PATCH v4 next 6/9] locking/osq: Use cpu number for 'next' pointer David Laight
2026-11-06 10:25 ` [tip: locking/core] locking/osq: Use CPU " tip-bot2 for David Laight
2026-09-07 8:41 ` [PATCH v4 next 7/9] locking/osq: Use 'unsigned int' for next/prev/tail David Laight
2026-09-07 8:41 ` [PATCH v4 next 8/9] locking/osq: inline encode_cpu() and rename decode_cpu() David Laight
2026-09-07 8:41 ` [PATCH v4 next 9/9] locking/osq_lock: Swap next<->prev and tail<->head David Laight
2026-09-07 16:08 ` [PATCH v4 next 0/9] locking/osq_lock: Optimisations to osq_lock code Linus Torvalds
2026-09-07 17:27 ` David Laight
2026-09-09 14:15 ` Haakon Bugge
2026-09-09 19:09 ` David Laight
2026-09-09 20:14 ` Waiman Long
2026-09-09 20:33 ` Waiman Long
2026-09-10 9:45 ` Haakon Bugge
2026-09-10 11:00 ` David Laight
2026-09-10 11:31 ` Haakon Bugge
2026-09-10 12:05 ` David Laight
2026-09-10 15:30 ` Haakon Bugge
2026-09-10 16:22 ` Waiman Long
2026-09-11 17:15 ` David Laight
2026-09-14 11:46 ` Haakon Bugge
2026-09-14 13:24 ` David Laight
2026-09-11 10:08 ` David Laight
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=20260915131510.GD4121620@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=boqun@kernel.org \
--cc=david.laight.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=laoar.shao@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=will@kernel.org \
/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.