linux-scsi.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@SteelEye.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: tglx@linutronix.de, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	SCSI Mailing List <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SCSI: Replace semaphores with wait_even
Date: 24 Oct 2004 20:02:24 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1098662552.10824.369.camel@mulgrave> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20041024230601.GA14956@elte.hu>

On Sun, 2004-10-24 at 19:06, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> i think i fixed this in my PREEMPT_REALTIME tree (having seen spinning
> eh_threads) - maybe Thomas forgot to merge those fixes back?
> 
> (in a PREEMPT_REALTIME kernel a spinning thread is just a thread eating
> up CPU power, it doesnt cause a hang.)

I've really got to say, I don't like what you're doing.  This program
seems to replace

if (condition)
	up(sem);
[...]
down(sem);


with

if (condition)
	up(event_queue);
[...]
wait_event(event_queue, condition);

That can be wrong on three counts:

1) The condition is a local one that will fluctuate between the wake_up
and the actual thread being scheduled to run
2) The actual condition you need to check for might not be the same as
the one that triggered the wake_up.  This is what the SCSI problem was.
3) There might genuinely be n triggers of the event.  With a semaphore,
if we get three up()'s before the waiting thread is schedules, it will
process three times.  With wait_event, the other two will be lost.

Thus, to effect this replacement, you need a thorough audit of what is
usually pretty non-trivial code.

What's the overriding reason for doing this?  the pain doesn't look to
be worth the gain (since I don't see any gain).

James



      reply	other threads:[~2004-10-25  0:02 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-10-20 19:29 [PATCH] SCSI: Replace semaphores with wait_even Thomas Gleixner
2004-10-24 19:57 ` James Bottomley
2004-10-24 20:06   ` Thomas Gleixner
2004-10-24 23:01     ` James Bottomley
2004-10-24 23:06       ` Ingo Molnar
2004-10-25  0:02         ` James Bottomley [this message]

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=1098662552.10824.369.camel@mulgrave \
    --to=james.bottomley@steeleye.com \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).