From: Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@de.ibm.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mutex: Introduce arch_mutex_cpu_relax()
Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 15:12:36 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1290521556.16834.25.camel@thinkpad> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20101122121049.01c4690a.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
On Mo, 2010-11-22 at 12:10 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Nov 2010 15:47:36 +0100
> Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@de.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> > From: Gerald Schaefer <gerald.schaefer@de.ibm.com>
> >
> > The spinning mutex implementation uses cpu_relax() in busy loops as a
> > compiler barrier. Depending on the architecture, cpu_relax() may do more
> > than needed in this specific mutex spin loops. On System z we also give
> > up the time slice of the virtual cpu in cpu_relax(), which prevents
> > effective spinning on the mutex.
> >
> > This patch replaces cpu_relax() in the spinning mutex code with
> > arch_mutex_cpu_relax(), which can be defined by each architecture that
> > selects HAVE_ARCH_MUTEX_CPU_RELAX. The default is still cpu_relax(), so
> > this patch should not affect other architectures than System z for now.
> >
> > ...
> >
> > --- a/include/linux/mutex.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/mutex.h
> > @@ -160,4 +160,8 @@ extern int mutex_trylock(struct mutex *l
> > extern void mutex_unlock(struct mutex *lock);
> > extern int atomic_dec_and_mutex_lock(atomic_t *cnt, struct mutex *lock);
> >
> > +#ifndef CONFIG_HAVE_ARCH_MUTEX_CPU_RELAX
> > +#define arch_mutex_cpu_relax() cpu_relax()
> > +#endif
>
> A simpler way of doing this is to remove the CONFIG_ variable
> altogether and do
>
> #ifndef arch_mutex_cpu_relax
> #define arch_mutex_cpu_relax() cpu_relax()
> #endif
>
> When doing this, one should be clear about _which_ arch file has the
> responsibility of defining arch_mutex_cpu_relax, and make sure that
> this arch file is reliably included in the .c file.
Well, I've tried that with my last approach, defining arch_mutex_cpu_relax()
in <asm/mutex.h> and including that from <linux/mutex.h>. This didn't work
well because of ugly header file dependencies, and Peter also commented
that "including "asm/mutex.h" isn't advised". The problem is the following
code in kernel/mutex.c (after including <linux/mutex.h>) when
CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES is set:
#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES
# include "mutex-debug.h"
# include <asm-generic/mutex-null.h>
#else
# include "mutex.h"
# include <asm/mutex.h>
#endif
So I can only include <asm/mutex.h> from <linux/mutex.h> with an ugly
"#ifndef CONFIG_DEBUG_MUTEXES" around it, or use a completely different
or new arch header file (but <asm/mutex.h> seems like the right place
for this). The CONFIG_ approach avoids all this header file dependency
mess, or did I miss something (or maybe it's just me and it is not ugly
at all)?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-23 14:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-22 14:47 [PATCH] mutex: Introduce arch_mutex_cpu_relax() Gerald Schaefer
2010-11-22 20:10 ` Andrew Morton
2010-11-23 14:12 ` Gerald Schaefer [this message]
2010-11-23 14:20 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-11-23 15:03 ` Gerald Schaefer
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-10-14 15:33 [PATCH] mutex: Introduce mutex_cpu_relax() Gerald Schaefer
2010-10-14 15:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-10-14 17:31 ` Gerald Schaefer
2010-10-14 17:40 ` Gerald Schaefer
2010-10-14 22:13 ` Andrew Morton
2010-10-15 10:55 ` Gerald Schaefer
2010-10-15 11:07 ` [PATCH] mutex: Introduce arch_mutex_cpu_relax() Gerald Schaefer
2010-10-18 18:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-10-19 12:24 ` Gerald Schaefer
2010-10-19 15:18 ` Gerald Schaefer
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=1290521556.16834.25.camel@thinkpad \
--to=gerald.schaefer@de.ibm.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=schwidefsky@de.ibm.com \
/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).