From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com>,
Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Chris Mason <chris.mason@oracle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
Peter Morreale <pmorreale@novell.com>,
Sven Dietrich <SDietrich@novell.com>,
Dmitry Adamushko <dmitry.adamushko@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v9][RFC] mutex: implement adaptive spinning
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 10:21:09 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0901131013580.6528@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090113181222.GA24910@elte.hu>
On Tue, 13 Jan 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> And v8 is rock solid in all my testing - and i'll give v10 a similar
> workout as well.
The differences between v8 and v10 are very fundamental, since v8 does the
spinning inside the spinlock'ed loop (the spinning itself is not inside
the spinlock, but all the "real action" is). So v8 not showing problems
doesn't really say much about v10 - totally different algorithms that
share only some of the support code.
So even if many lines look the same, those code-lines aren't the really
interesting ones. The only really interesting once is really the
atomic_cmpxchg (outside spinlock) vs atomic_xchg (inside spinlock), and
those are almost diametrically opposite.
> Would you prefer a single commit or is this kind of delta development
> history useful, with all the variants (at least the later, more promising
> ones) included?
I'm not sure it makes sense to show the history here, especially as there
really were two different approaches, and while they share many issues,
they sure aren't equivalent nor are we really talking about any evolution
of the patch except in the sense of one being the kick-starter for the
alternative approach.
What _can_ make sense is to commit some of the infrastructure helper code
separately, ie the lock ownership and preemption changes, since those
really are independent of the spinning code, and at least the preemption
thing is interesting and relevant even without it.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-13 18:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 92+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-12 15:37 [PATCH -v8][RFC] mutex: implement adaptive spinning Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-12 16:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-12 16:20 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-12 16:45 ` Chris Mason
2009-01-12 16:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-12 17:14 ` Chris Mason
2009-01-12 17:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-12 17:30 ` Chris Mason
2009-01-12 17:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-12 17:33 ` Boaz Harrosh
2009-01-12 18:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-12 16:13 ` Avi Kivity
2009-01-12 17:13 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-12 17:23 ` Avi Kivity
2009-01-12 17:32 ` Avi Kivity
2009-01-14 16:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-14 17:04 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-14 17:23 ` Avi Kivity
2009-01-15 0:50 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-13 15:15 ` [PATCH -v9][RFC] " Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-13 16:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-13 16:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-13 16:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-13 16:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-13 16:49 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-13 17:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-13 18:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-13 18:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-13 19:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-14 2:58 ` Chris Mason
2009-01-14 11:18 ` Dmitry Adamushko
2009-01-14 16:47 ` Chris Mason
2009-01-14 17:32 ` Dmitry Adamushko
2009-01-14 11:21 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-14 15:43 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-14 16:23 ` Chris Mason
2009-01-14 17:06 ` [PATCH -v11 delta] " Ingo Molnar
2009-01-14 17:00 ` [PATCH -v11][RFC] " Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-14 17:18 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-14 17:22 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-15 0:46 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-15 7:44 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-15 7:52 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-14 18:33 ` [GIT PULL] adaptive spinning mutexes Ingo Molnar
2009-01-14 18:40 ` Chris Mason
2009-01-15 9:53 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-14 18:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-14 19:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-15 17:44 ` Matthew Wilcox
2009-01-15 18:05 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-15 18:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-15 18:16 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-15 19:26 ` Chris Mason
2009-01-15 20:13 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-15 21:04 ` Chris Mason
2009-01-15 22:03 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-16 13:32 ` Folkert van Heusden
2009-01-16 13:57 ` Folkert van Heusden
2009-01-16 18:37 ` Bill Davidsen
2009-01-16 0:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-16 1:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2009-01-16 1:34 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-01-16 14:07 ` Folkert van Heusden
2009-01-16 3:03 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-15 18:06 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-14 18:53 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-14 19:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-14 19:36 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-14 19:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-14 20:21 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-14 20:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-14 20:44 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-14 20:14 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-14 20:30 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-14 20:51 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-14 21:06 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-14 21:14 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-14 21:35 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-14 23:23 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-15 0:55 ` Nick Piggin
2009-01-14 21:41 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-14 21:50 ` Kay Sievers
2009-01-14 22:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-15 11:45 ` Folkert van Heusden
2009-01-15 12:53 ` Chris Samuel
2009-01-14 19:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-01-14 19:33 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-01-15 8:41 ` [PATCH] mutex: set owner only once on acquisition Johannes Weiner
2009-01-15 8:56 ` Johannes Weiner
2009-01-13 18:12 ` [PATCH -v9][RFC] mutex: implement adaptive spinning Ingo Molnar
2009-01-13 18:21 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2009-01-13 18:24 ` Ingo Molnar
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=alpine.LFD.2.00.0901131013580.6528@localhost.localdomain \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=SDietrich@novell.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=chris.mason@oracle.com \
--cc=dmitry.adamushko@gmail.com \
--cc=ghaskins@novell.com \
--cc=linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=npiggin@suse.de \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pmorreale@novell.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