public inbox for linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Chris Wedgwood <cw@f00f.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	torvalds@osdl.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Ia64 Linux <linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Horrible regression with -CURRENT from "Don't busy-lock-loop in preemptable spinlocks" patch
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 07:08:52 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050118070852.GA26049@taniwha.stupidest.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050118042858.GD14709@cse.unsw.EDU.AU>

On Tue, Jan 18, 2005 at 03:28:58PM +1100, Darren Williams wrote:

> On top of Ingo's patch I attempt a solution that failed:

> +#define read_is_locked(x)	(*(volatile int *) (x) > 0)
> +#define write_is_locked(x)	(*(volatile int *) (x) < 0)

how about something like:

#define read_is_locked(x)    (*(volatile int *) (x) != 0)
#define write_is_locked(x)   (*(volatile int *) (x) & (1<<31))

I'm not masking the write-bit for read_is_locked here, I'm not sure is
we should?


   --cw

  reply	other threads:[~2005-01-18  7:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <20050117055044.GA3514@taniwha.stupidest.org>
     [not found] ` <20050116230922.7274f9a2.akpm@osdl.org>
     [not found]   ` <20050117143301.GA10341@elte.hu>
2005-01-18  1:47     ` Horrible regression with -CURRENT from "Don't busy-lock-loop in preemptable spinlocks" patch Darren Williams
2005-01-18  4:28       ` Darren Williams
2005-01-18  7:08         ` Chris Wedgwood [this message]
2005-01-19  0:14       ` Peter Chubb
2005-01-19  8:04         ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-19  9:18           ` Peter Chubb
2005-01-19  9:20             ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-19 21:43               ` Paul Mackerras
2005-01-20  2:34                 ` [PATCH RFC] 'spinlock/rwlock fixes' V3 [1/1] Chris Wedgwood
2005-01-20  3:01                   ` Andrew Morton
2005-01-20  3:18                     ` Chris Wedgwood
2005-01-20  3:33                       ` Andrew Morton
2005-01-20  8:59                       ` Peter Chubb
2005-01-20 13:04                         ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 15:51                         ` Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 16:08                           ` [patch 1/3] spinlock fix #1, *_can_lock() primitives Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:11                             ` [patch 2/3] spinlock fix #2: generalize [spin|rw]lock yielding Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:12                               ` [patch 3/3] spinlock fix #3: type-checking spinlock primitives, x86 Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:14                                 ` [patch] stricter type-checking rwlock " Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:16                                   ` [patch] minor spinlock cleanups Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:31                             ` [patch 1/3] spinlock fix #1, *_can_lock() primitives Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 16:40                               ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 17:48                                 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 17:53                                   ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 18:22                                     ` [patch, BK-curr] nonintrusive spin-polling loop in kernel/spinlock.c Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 18:25                                       ` [patch, BK-curr] rename 'lock' to 'slock' in asm-i386/spinlock.h Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 23:45                                       ` [patch, BK-curr] nonintrusive spin-polling loop in kernel/spinlock.c Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 16:44                               ` [patch 1/3] spinlock fix #1, *_can_lock() primitives Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:59                                 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:47                               ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:57                               ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:05                       ` [PATCH RFC] 'spinlock/rwlock fixes' V3 [1/1] Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 16:20                         ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:18                   ` Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 16:23                     ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 17:30                       ` Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 17:38                         ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:28                     ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20  5:49                 ` Horrible regression with -CURRENT from "Don't busy-lock-loop in preemptable spinlocks" patch Grant Grundler

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=20050118070852.GA26049@taniwha.stupidest.org \
    --to=cw@f00f.org \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.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