From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>
Cc: Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Martin Schwidefsky <schwidefsky@de.ibm.com>,
Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@de.ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@linux.intel.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mutex: have non-spinning mutexes on s390 by default
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2009 20:34:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1239302075.4557.4225.camel@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49DE354E.9000607@goop.org>
On Thu, 2009-04-09 at 10:50 -0700, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, 2009-04-09 at 18:53 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> >
> >> I was looking at how an monitor-wait could be used here, but that
> >> appears non-trivial, there's two variables we're watching, lock->owner
> >> and rq->curr, either could change.
> >>
> >> Reducing that to 1 seems an interesting problem :-)
> >>
> >
> > How about something like this?
> >
> > Does it make sense to implement an monitor-wait spinlock for the virt
> > case as well? Avi, Jeremy?
> >
>
> Last time I tried to put mwait in a spinlock, Arjan (or HPA?) said that
> mwait takes approx a week and a half to wake up, and that it was really
> only useful for idle power savings.
Yeah, sad that.
> Has that changed?
Nothing much, I was thinking perhaps it would make sense for the virt
case, but if its not properly virtualized then its pretty useless
indeed.
monitor-wait is basically a hardware/hv futex like thing, so I thought
it might help -- spinning in a guest is pretty painful.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-09 18:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-04-09 15:47 [PATCH] mutex: have non-spinning mutexes on s390 by default Heiko Carstens
2009-04-09 15:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-04-09 16:14 ` Heiko Carstens
2009-04-09 16:48 ` Heiko Carstens
2009-04-09 16:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-04-09 17:38 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-04-09 17:50 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2009-04-09 18:34 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2009-04-09 18:12 ` [tip:core/urgent] " Heiko Carstens
2009-04-17 21:42 ` [PATCH] " Folkert van Heusden
2009-04-20 12:01 ` Heiko Carstens
2009-04-20 12:04 ` 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=1239302075.4557.4225.camel@laptop \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=avi@redhat.com \
--cc=borntraeger@de.ibm.com \
--cc=heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--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