From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-s390 <linux-s390@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
Noam Camus <noamc@ezchip.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH/RFC 0/5] cpu_relax: introduce yield, remove lowlatency
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 13:58:53 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1477051138-1610-1-git-send-email-borntraeger@de.ibm.com> (raw)
For spinning loops people did often use barrier() or cpu_relax().
For most architectures cpu_relax and barrier are the same, but on
some architectures cpu_relax can add some latency. For example on s390
cpu_relax gives up the time slice to the hypervisor. On power cpu_relax
tries to give some of the CPU to the neighbor threads. To reduce the
latency another variant cpu_relax_lowlatency was introduced. Before this
is used in more and more places, lets revert the logic of provide a new
function cpu_relax_yield that can spend some time and for s390 yields
the guest CPU.
So my proposal boils down to:
- lowest latency: use barrier() or mb() if necessary
- low latency: use cpu_relax (e.g. might give up some cpu for the other
threads)
- really give up CPU: use cpu_relax_yield
The alternative is to keep cpu_relax_lowlatency if there is some need.
Not fully sure about arc/eznps and power, but lets hear first if the
approach is ok.
PS: In the long run I would also try to provide for s390 something like
cpu_relax_yield_to with a cpu number (or just add that to cpu_relax_yield),
since a yield_to is always better than a yield as long as we know the waiter.
Christian Borntraeger (5):
processor.h: introduce cpu_relax_yield
stop_machine: yield CPU during stop machine
s390: make cpu_relax a barrier again
Remove cpu_relax_lowlatency users
remove cpu_relax_lowlatency
arch/alpha/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/arc/include/asm/processor.h | 2 ++
arch/arm/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/arm64/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/avr32/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/blackfin/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/c6x/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/cris/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/frv/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/h8300/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/hexagon/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/ia64/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/m32r/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/m68k/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/metag/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/microblaze/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/mips/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/mn10300/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/nios2/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/openrisc/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/parisc/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/powerpc/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/s390/include/asm/processor.h | 4 ++--
arch/s390/kernel/processor.c | 4 ++--
arch/score/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/sh/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/sparc/include/asm/processor_32.h | 2 +-
arch/sparc/include/asm/processor_64.h | 2 +-
arch/tile/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/unicore32/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/x86/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
arch/xtensa/include/asm/processor.h | 2 +-
drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_gem_request.c | 2 +-
drivers/vhost/net.c | 4 ++--
kernel/locking/mcs_spinlock.h | 4 ++--
kernel/locking/mutex.c | 4 ++--
kernel/locking/osq_lock.c | 6 +++---
kernel/locking/qrwlock.c | 6 +++---
kernel/locking/rwsem-xadd.c | 4 ++--
kernel/stop_machine.c | 2 +-
lib/lockref.c | 2 +-
41 files changed, 52 insertions(+), 50 deletions(-)
--
2.5.5
next reply other threads:[~2016-10-21 11:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-10-21 11:58 Christian Borntraeger [this message]
2016-10-21 11:58 ` [PATCH 1/5] processor.h: introduce cpu_relax_yield Christian Borntraeger
2016-10-21 11:58 ` [PATCH 2/5] stop_machine: yield CPU during stop machine Christian Borntraeger
2016-10-21 12:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-10-21 12:41 ` Juergen Gross
2016-10-22 0:06 ` Nicholas Piggin
2016-10-24 7:52 ` Christian Borntraeger
2016-10-24 8:47 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-10-21 11:58 ` [PATCH 3/5] s390: make cpu_relax a barrier again Christian Borntraeger
2016-10-21 11:58 ` [PATCH 4/5] Remove cpu_relax_lowlatency users Christian Borntraeger
2016-10-21 11:58 ` [PATCH 5/5] remove cpu_relax_lowlatency Christian Borntraeger
2016-10-21 12:06 ` [PATCH/RFC 0/5] cpu_relax: introduce yield, remove lowlatency Peter Zijlstra
2016-10-21 14:57 ` David Miller
2016-10-21 15:08 ` Christian Borntraeger
2016-10-21 15:12 ` David Miller
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=1477051138-1610-1-git-send-email-borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--to=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-s390@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=noamc@ezchip.com \
--cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--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).