From: Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>
To: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@hp.com>
Cc: mingo@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com,
peter@hurleysoftware.com, riel@redhat.com, hpa@zytor.com,
walken@google.com, Waiman.Long@hp.com, aswin@hp.com,
scott.norton@hp.com, chegu_vinod@hp.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3] locking/mutex: Correct documentation on mutex optimistic spinning
Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2014 13:30:57 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1401913857.2232.6.camel@j-VirtualBox> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1401912696.13877.5.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net>
On Wed, 2014-06-04 at 13:11 -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-06-04 at 12:08 -0700, Jason Low wrote:
> > The mutex optimistic spinning documentation states that we spin for
> > acquisition when we find that there are no pending waiters. However,
> > in actuality, whether or not there are waiters for the mutex doesn't
> > determine if we will spin for it.
> >
> > This patch removes that statement and also adds a comment which
> > mentions that we spin for the mutex while we don't need to reschedule.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>
>
> Acked-by: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@hp.com>
>
> I think this could go in with v4 of the mutex doc rewrite patch...
> guessing for 3.17 now.
Yeah, this patch could be for 3.17.
Thanks,
Jason
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-06-04 20:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-06-04 19:08 [RFC PATCH 0/3] locking/mutex: Modifications to mutex Jason Low
2014-06-04 19:08 ` [RFC PATCH 1/3] locking/mutex: Try to acquire mutex only if it is unlocked Jason Low
2014-06-04 19:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2014-06-04 20:57 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-06-04 20:58 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-06-09 17:38 ` Jason Low
2014-06-11 21:00 ` Long, Wai Man
2014-06-11 21:48 ` Jason Low
2014-06-12 1:25 ` Long, Wai Man
2014-06-04 21:53 ` Jason Low
2014-06-04 21:26 ` Jason Low
2014-06-04 21:54 ` Thomas Gleixner
2014-06-04 22:13 ` Jason Low
2014-06-05 3:24 ` Waiman Long
2014-06-05 19:21 ` Jason Low
2014-06-04 19:08 ` [RFC PATCH 2/3] locking/mutex: Correct documentation on mutex optimistic spinning Jason Low
2014-06-04 20:11 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-06-04 20:30 ` Jason Low [this message]
2014-06-04 19:08 ` [RFC PATCH 3/3] locking/mutex: Optimize mutex trylock slowpath Jason Low
2014-06-04 20:28 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-06-04 21:47 ` Jason Low
2014-06-05 1:10 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-06-05 3:08 ` Jason Low
2014-06-04 20:13 ` [RFC PATCH 0/3] locking/mutex: Modifications to mutex Davidlohr Bueso
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=1401913857.2232.6.camel@j-VirtualBox \
--to=jason.low2@hp.com \
--cc=Waiman.Long@hp.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=aswin@hp.com \
--cc=chegu_vinod@hp.com \
--cc=davidlohr@hp.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=peter@hurleysoftware.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
--cc=scott.norton@hp.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=walken@google.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