From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@ozlabs.org>
To: Li Zhong <zhong@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org,
PowerPC email list <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>,
agraf@suse.com, Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>,
Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] KVM: PPC: Don't take lock when check irq's resend flag
Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2016 15:27:17 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160620052717.GC29366@fergus.ozlabs.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1463382133.19947.10.camel@TP420>
On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 03:02:13PM +0800, Li Zhong wrote:
> It seems that we don't need to take the lock before evaluating irq's
> resend flag. What needed is to make sure when we clear the ics's bit
> in the icp's resend_map, we don't miss the resend flag of the irqs
> that set the bit.
>
> And seems this could be ordered through the barrier in test_and_clear_bit(),
> and an newly added wmb when setting irq's resend flag, and icp's resend_map.
This looks fine to me. Is there a measurable performance improvement
from this? I understand it could be hard to measure.
Also, you could make the patch description more definite - just say
that we don't need to take the lock, there's no need for "seems".
Paul.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-20 5:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-05-16 6:58 [RFC PATCH 1/2] KVM: PPC: divide the ics lock into smaller ones for each irq Li Zhong
2016-05-16 7:02 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] KVM: PPC: Don't take lock when check irq's resend flag Li Zhong
2016-06-20 5:27 ` Paul Mackerras [this message]
2016-06-21 2:57 ` Li Zhong
2016-06-20 5:25 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] KVM: PPC: divide the ics lock into smaller ones for each irq Paul Mackerras
2016-06-21 2:47 ` Li Zhong
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=20160620052717.GC29366@fergus.ozlabs.ibm.com \
--to=paulus@ozlabs.org \
--cc=agraf@suse.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=boqun.feng@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
--cc=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=zhong@linux.vnet.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).