public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stephane Eranian <eranian@hpl.hp.com>
To: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ak@suse.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] x86-64 TIF flags for debug regs and io bitmap in ctxsw
Date: Tue, 4 Jul 2006 01:10:55 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060704081055.GD5902@frankl.hpl.hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1151999509.3109.6.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>

On Tue, Jul 04, 2006 at 09:51:49AM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > -		}
> > -	}
> > +	if (unlikely((task_thread_info(next_p)->flags & _TIF_WORK_CTXSW))
> > +	    || test_tsk_thread_flag(prev_p, TIF_IO_BITMAP))
> > +		__switch_to_xtra(prev_p, next_p, tss);
> 
> well isn't this replacing an if() (which isn't cheap but also not
> expensive, due to unlikely()) with an atomic operation (which *is*
> expensive) ?
> 
> That to me doesn't make this sound like an actual win....
> 
Although the two if were marked unlikely, you had to do the test anyway.
So you had to touch next->debugreg[7], next->io_bitmap_ptr, and prev->io_bitmap_ptr.
Now the first two are collapsed into one cache line in thread_info->flags.

Yet, I see your point about the test_tsk_thread_flag() and I am wondering if we
do need the atomicity in this case and whether we could simplify by using the
same expression as for next, i.e, task_thread_info(prev_p)->flags & TIF_IO_BITMAP?

-- 
-Stephane

  parent reply	other threads:[~2006-07-04  8:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-07-04  7:28 [PATCH 1/2] x86-64 TIF flags for debug regs and io bitmap in ctxsw Stephane Eranian
2006-07-04  7:51 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-07-04  8:09   ` Andi Kleen
2006-07-04  8:22     ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-07-04  8:10   ` Stephane Eranian [this message]
2006-07-04  8:14   ` Stephane Eranian
2006-07-04  8:14 ` Andi Kleen
2006-07-04  8:20   ` Stephane Eranian
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-07-04  9:05 Mikael Pettersson
2006-07-04 10:22 ` Andi Kleen
2006-07-04  9:20 Mikael Pettersson

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=20060704081055.GD5902@frankl.hpl.hp.com \
    --to=eranian@hpl.hp.com \
    --cc=ak@suse.de \
    --cc=arjan@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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