From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate.crashing.org (gate.crashing.org [63.228.1.57]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3vDFLc5gVrzDq5k for ; Thu, 2 Feb 2017 07:37:44 +1100 (AEDT) Message-ID: <1485981445.4850.8.camel@kernel.crashing.org> Subject: Re: [RFC] implement QUEUED spinlocks on powerpc From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt To: Eric Dumazet , Paul Mackerras , Michael Ellerman Cc: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Kevin Hao , Torsten Duwe , Eric Dumazet , Pan Xinhui Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2017 07:37:25 +1100 In-Reply-To: <1485968734.6360.154.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com> References: <1485968734.6360.154.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Mime-Version: 1.0 List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Wed, 2017-02-01 at 09:05 -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote: > Hi all > > Is anybody working on adding QUEUED spinlocks to powerpc 64bit ? > > I've seen past attempts with ticket spinlocks > ( https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/449381/ and other related links > ) > > But it looks ticket spinlocks are a thing of the past. Yes, we have a tentative implementation of qspinlock and pv variants: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/703139/ https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/703140/ https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/703141/ https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/703142/ https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/703143/ https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/703144/ Michael, what's the status with getting that merged ? Cheers, Ben.