From: Torsten Duwe <duwe@lst.de>
To: Raghavendra KT <raghavendra.kt.linux@gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Musta <tommusta@gmail.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Raghavendra KT <raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>,
Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] powerpc ticket locks
Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 11:40:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20140211104030.GG2107@lst.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAC4Lta2Pssu5QY_QLmy5C3Fm2G3fwpiuc5BNOLBnQTmmRH+W4Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 03:23:51PM +0530, Raghavendra KT wrote:
> How much important to have holder information for PPC? From my
> previous experiment
> on x86, it was lock-waiter preemption which is problematic rather than
> lock-holder preemption.
It's something very special to IBM pSeries: the hypervisor can assign
fractions of physical CPUs to guests. Sometimes a guest with 4 quarter
CPUs will be faster than 1 monoprocessor. (correct me if I'm wrong).
The directed yield resolves the silly situation when holder and waiter
reside on the same physical CPU, as I understand it.
x86 has nothing comparable.
Torsten
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-11 10:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-02-07 16:58 [PATCH v2] powerpc ticket locks Torsten Duwe
2014-02-07 17:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-02-07 17:55 ` Torsten Duwe
2014-02-10 3:10 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-02-10 15:52 ` Torsten Duwe
2014-02-10 17:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-02-11 2:44 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-02-11 2:56 ` Al Viro
2014-02-11 3:38 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-02-11 9:53 ` Raghavendra KT
2014-02-11 10:40 ` Torsten Duwe [this message]
2014-02-11 18:30 ` Scott Wood
2014-02-11 19:34 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2014-02-11 9:39 ` Raghavendra KT
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=20140211104030.GG2107@lst.de \
--to=duwe@lst.de \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=raghavendra.kt.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=scottwood@freescale.com \
--cc=tommusta@gmail.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).