From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] mutex: Queue mutex spinners with MCS lock to reduce cacheline contention Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 09:50:55 +0200 Message-ID: <20130417075055.GC31607@gmail.com> References: <1366036679-9702-1-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hp.com> <1366036679-9702-3-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hp.com> <20130416091026.GB9569@gmail.com> <516D5F97.9050203@hp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <516D5F97.9050203@hp.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Waiman Long Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , "Paul E. McKenney" , David Howells , Dave Jones , Clark Williams , Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, "Chandramouleeswaran, Aswin" , Davidlohr Bueso , "Norton, Scott J" , Rik van Riel List-Id: linux-arch.vger.kernel.org * Waiman Long wrote: > > I'd suggest a preparatory patch that gets rid of that flag and moves these two > > functions from sched/core.c to mutex.c where they belong. > > > > This will also allow the removal of the mutex prototypes from sched.h. > > Yes, I can certainly prepare a patch to remove SCHED_FEAT_OWNER_SPIN & move > those functions back to mutex.c after my patch set goes in. As for the timing, > do you want me to do it now or it can wait as I will start my vacation later > this week and will be back by the end of the month. I'd suggest waiting with the latest series until you are back, so that you can address regressions, should there be any. Thanks, Ingo From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ee0-f53.google.com ([74.125.83.53]:60076 "EHLO mail-ee0-f53.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965738Ab3DQHu7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Apr 2013 03:50:59 -0400 Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2013 09:50:55 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] mutex: Queue mutex spinners with MCS lock to reduce cacheline contention Message-ID: <20130417075055.GC31607@gmail.com> References: <1366036679-9702-1-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hp.com> <1366036679-9702-3-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hp.com> <20130416091026.GB9569@gmail.com> <516D5F97.9050203@hp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <516D5F97.9050203@hp.com> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Waiman Long Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , "Paul E. McKenney" , David Howells , Dave Jones , Clark Williams , Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, x86@kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, "Chandramouleeswaran, Aswin" , Davidlohr Bueso , "Norton, Scott J" , Rik van Riel Message-ID: <20130417075055.SEaW4--piPYWmdxTZAVipPaYLE5UEUX76Eww_wUcvBQ@z> * Waiman Long wrote: > > I'd suggest a preparatory patch that gets rid of that flag and moves these two > > functions from sched/core.c to mutex.c where they belong. > > > > This will also allow the removal of the mutex prototypes from sched.h. > > Yes, I can certainly prepare a patch to remove SCHED_FEAT_OWNER_SPIN & move > those functions back to mutex.c after my patch set goes in. As for the timing, > do you want me to do it now or it can wait as I will start my vacation later > this week and will be back by the end of the month. I'd suggest waiting with the latest series until you are back, so that you can address regressions, should there be any. Thanks, Ingo