From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: Waiman Long <waiman.long@hp.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@redhat.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@suse.cz>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
"Chandramouleeswaran, Aswin" <aswin@hp.com>,
"Norton, Scott J" <scott.norton@hp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] spinlock: New spinlock_refcount.h for lockless update of refcount
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 2013 03:06:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130627010658.GL6123@two.firstfloor.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <51CB7898.5070206@hp.com>
> In the uncontended case, doing spin_unlock_wait will be similar to
> spin_can_lock. This, when combined with a cmpxchg, is still faster
> than doing 2 atomic operations in spin_lock/spin_unlock.
I'm totally against any new users of spin_unlock_wait()
It has bizarre semantics, most likely will make various
lock optimizations impossible, it's race condition hell
for most users etc.
spin_can_lock() is not quite as bad has a lot of the similar problems.
> BTW, spin_can_lock is just the negation of spin_is_locked.
e.g. with elision it's not.
-Andi
--
ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-06-27 1:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-06-26 17:43 [PATCH v2 0/2] Lockless update of reference count protected by spinlock Waiman Long
2013-06-26 17:43 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] spinlock: New spinlock_refcount.h for lockless update of refcount Waiman Long
2013-06-26 20:17 ` Andi Kleen
2013-06-26 21:07 ` Waiman Long
2013-06-26 21:22 ` Andi Kleen
2013-06-26 23:26 ` Waiman Long
2013-06-27 1:06 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2013-06-27 1:15 ` Waiman Long
2013-06-27 1:24 ` Waiman Long
2013-06-27 1:37 ` Andi Kleen
2013-06-27 14:56 ` Waiman Long
2013-06-28 13:46 ` Thomas Gleixner
2013-06-29 20:30 ` Waiman Long
2013-06-26 23:27 ` Thomas Gleixner
2013-06-26 23:06 ` Thomas Gleixner
2013-06-27 0:16 ` Waiman Long
2013-06-27 14:44 ` Thomas Gleixner
2013-06-29 21:03 ` Waiman Long
2013-06-27 0:26 ` Waiman Long
2013-06-29 17:45 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-06-29 20:23 ` Waiman Long
2013-06-29 21:34 ` Waiman Long
2013-06-29 22:11 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-06-29 22:34 ` Waiman Long
2013-06-29 21:58 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-06-29 22:47 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-07-01 13:40 ` Waiman Long
2013-06-26 17:43 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] dcache: Locklessly update d_count whenever possible Waiman Long
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=20130627010658.GL6123@two.firstfloor.org \
--to=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=aswin@hp.com \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=jlayton@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=mszeredi@suse.cz \
--cc=scott.norton@hp.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=waiman.long@hp.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