From: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
To: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com>,
hhuang@redhat.com, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] ipc/sem.c: Always use only one queue for alter operations.
Date: Mon, 27 May 2013 14:00:03 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51A39F23.2080507@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1369559335-13491-4-git-send-email-manfred@colorfullife.com>
On 05/26/2013 05:08 AM, Manfred Spraul wrote:
> There are two places that can contain alter operations:
> - the global queue: sma->pending_alter
> - the per-semaphore queues: sma->sem_base[].pending_alter.
>
> Since one of the queues must be processed first, this causes an odd
> priorization of the wakeups:
> Right now, complex operations have priority over simple ops.
>
> The patch restores the behavior of linux <=3.0.9: The longest
> waiting operation has the highest priority.
>
> This is done by using only one queue:
> - if there are complex ops, then sma->pending_alter is used.
> - otherwise, the per-semaphore queues are used.
>
> As a side effect, do_smart_update_queue() becomes much simpler:
> No more goto logic.
>
> Signed-off-by: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
This is the one where I really wonder whether the
complexity is warranted.
Again, the code does look correct.
Acked-by: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-27 18:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-26 9:08 [PATCH 0/4] ipc/sem.c: Bug fixes, regression fixes, v3 Manfred Spraul
2013-05-26 9:08 ` [PATCH 1/4] ipc/sem.c: Fix missing wakeups in do_smart_update_queue() Manfred Spraul
2013-05-27 17:51 ` Rik van Riel
2013-05-27 19:53 ` Manfred Spraul
2013-05-26 9:08 ` [PATCH 2/4] ipc/sem: seperate wait-for-zero and alter tasks into seperate queues Manfred Spraul
2013-05-27 17:57 ` Rik van Riel
2013-06-01 9:20 ` Manfred Spraul
2013-06-01 10:03 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-06-01 10:05 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-06-01 11:04 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-06-01 11:52 ` Manfred Spraul
2013-05-26 9:08 ` [PATCH 3/4] ipc/sem.c: Always use only one queue for alter operations Manfred Spraul
2013-05-27 18:00 ` Rik van Riel [this message]
2013-05-26 9:08 ` [PATCH 4/4] ipc/sem.c: Rename try_atomic_semop() to perform_atomic_semop(), docu update Manfred Spraul
2013-05-27 17:59 ` Rik van Riel
2013-05-26 17:37 ` [PATCH 0/4] ipc/sem.c: Bug fixes, regression fixes, v3 Linus Torvalds
2013-05-26 20:50 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2013-05-26 22:59 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-05-27 15:57 ` Manfred Spraul
2013-05-28 20:37 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2013-05-27 2:04 ` Greg KH
2013-05-27 17:50 ` Rik van Riel
2013-05-27 19:57 ` Greg KH
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=51A39F23.2080507@redhat.com \
--to=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davidlohr.bueso@hp.com \
--cc=hhuang@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=manfred@colorfullife.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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.