From: will.deacon@arm.com (Will Deacon)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [PATCH 6/9] locking/qrwlock: allow architectures to hook in to contended paths
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2015 14:35:12 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150708133512.GD9283@arm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150708100657.GD3644@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Wed, Jul 08, 2015 at 11:06:57AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2015 at 06:24:22PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> > When contended, architectures may be able to reduce the polling overhead
> > in ways which aren't expressible using a simple relax() primitive.
> >
> > This patch allows architectures to override the use of
> > cpu_relax_lowlatency() in the qrwlock code and also implement their own
> > unlock macros in case explicit signalling is required to wake up a
> > `relaxed' CPU spinning on an unlock event.
>
> No real objection, but could you do this _after_ you've converted
> AARGH64 to use the normal qrwlock, such that you can show the benefit
> with numbers?
Sure, although the biggest gain may be in the form of reduced power
consumption, which I can't easily measure on my development platform.
Will
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-08 13:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-07 17:24 [PATCH 0/9] locking/qrwlock: get qrwlocks up and running on arm64 Will Deacon
2015-07-07 17:24 ` [PATCH 1/9] locking/qrwlock: include <linux/spinlock.h> for arch_spin_{lock, unlock} Will Deacon
2015-07-07 17:24 ` [PATCH 2/9] locking/qrwlock: avoid redundant atomic_add_return on read_lock_slowpath Will Deacon
2015-07-07 17:51 ` Waiman Long
2015-07-07 18:19 ` Will Deacon
2015-07-07 19:28 ` Waiman Long
2015-07-08 9:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-08 13:37 ` Will Deacon
2015-07-07 21:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-07 17:24 ` [PATCH 3/9] locking/qrwlock: tidy up rspin_until_writer_unlock Will Deacon
2015-07-07 17:24 ` [PATCH 4/9] locking/qrwlock: implement queue_write_unlock using smp_store_release Will Deacon
2015-07-08 10:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-07 17:24 ` [PATCH 5/9] locking/qrwlock: remove redundant cmpxchg barriers on writer slow-path Will Deacon
2015-07-08 10:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-08 13:34 ` Will Deacon
2015-07-07 17:24 ` [PATCH 6/9] locking/qrwlock: allow architectures to hook in to contended paths Will Deacon
2015-07-08 10:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-08 13:35 ` Will Deacon [this message]
2015-07-07 17:24 ` [PATCH 7/9] locking/qrwlock: expose internal lock structure in qrwlock definition Will Deacon
2015-07-07 17:24 ` [PATCH 8/9] arm64: cmpxchg: implement cmpxchg_relaxed Will Deacon
2015-07-07 17:24 ` [PATCH 9/9] arm64: locking: replace read/write locks with generic qrwlock code Will Deacon
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=20150708133512.GD9283@arm.com \
--to=will.deacon@arm.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 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).