From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1753272AbXDMKZV@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753272AbXDMKZV (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 13 Apr 2007 06:25:21 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753281AbXDMKZV
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Fri, 13 Apr 2007 06:25:21 -0400
Received: from ns.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:48007 "EHLO mx1.suse.de"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753272AbXDMKZU (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 13 Apr 2007 06:25:20 -0400
Date: Fri, 13 Apr 2007 12:25:18 +0200
From: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>,
       David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
       Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       Linux Memory Management List <linux-mm@kvack.org>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] generic rwsems
Message-ID: <20070413102518.GD31487@wotan.suse.de>
References: <20070413100416.GC31487@wotan.suse.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20070413100416.GC31487@wotan.suse.de>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 12:04:16PM +0200, Nick Piggin wrote:
> OK, this patch is against 2.6.21-rc6 + Mathieu's atomic_long patches.
> 
> Last time this came up I was asked to get some numbers, so here are
> some in the changelog, captured with a simple kernel module tester.
> I got motivated again because of the MySQL/glibc/mmap_sem issue.
> 
> This patch converts all architectures to a generic rwsem implementation,
> which will compile down to the same code for i386, or powerpc, for
> example, and will allow some (eg. x86-64) to move away from spinlock
> based rwsems.

Oh, and it also converts powerpc and sparc64 to 64-bit counters, so
they can handle more than 32K tasks waiting (which was apparently a
real problem for SGI, and is probably a good thing).

But that reminds me:
> +/*
> + * the semaphore definition
> + */
> +struct rw_semaphore {
> +	atomic_long_t		count;
> +	spinlock_t		wait_lock;
> +	struct list_head	wait_list;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_DEBUG_LOCK_ALLOC
> +	struct lockdep_map dep_map;
> +#endif
> +};

I think I should put wait_lock after wait_list, so as to get a better
packing on most 64-bit architectures.