From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
To: linux-arch@vger.kernel.org
Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Subject: [PATCH v2] locking: add default arch_*_relax definitions for GENERIC_LOCKBREAK
Date: Tue, 23 Jul 2013 18:50:52 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1374601852-8360-1-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.com> (raw)
When running with GENERIC_LOCKBREAK=y, the locking implementations emit
calls to arch_{read,write,spin}_relax when spinning on a contended lock
in order to allow architectures to favour the CPU owning the lock if
possible.
In reality, everybody apart from PowerPC and S390 just does cpu_relax()
here, so make that the default behaviour and allow it to be overridden
if required.
Cc: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
---
Hi guys,
This is v2 of the RFC I sent last month (got tied up with conferences
since then):
http://marc.info/?l=linux-arch&m=137183506819071&w=2
I have corresponding arch/ changes, but I'd like to get the core change
merged first so that I don't inadvertently break things if the arch/
patches are merged out-of-order.
Cheers,
Will
kernel/spinlock.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
1 file changed, 14 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/spinlock.c b/kernel/spinlock.c
index 5cdd806..4b082b5 100644
--- a/kernel/spinlock.c
+++ b/kernel/spinlock.c
@@ -34,6 +34,20 @@
#else
#define raw_read_can_lock(l) read_can_lock(l)
#define raw_write_can_lock(l) write_can_lock(l)
+
+/*
+ * Some architectures can relax in favour of the CPU owning the lock.
+ */
+#ifndef arch_read_relax
+# define arch_read_relax(l) cpu_relax()
+#endif
+#ifndef arch_write_relax
+# define arch_write_relax(l) cpu_relax()
+#endif
+#ifndef arch_spin_relax
+# define arch_spin_relax(l) cpu_relax()
+#endif
+
/*
* We build the __lock_function inlines here. They are too large for
* inlining all over the place, but here is only one user per function
--
1.8.2.2
reply other threads:[~2013-07-23 17:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=1374601852-8360-1-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).