From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751733AbcFYTM2 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sat, 25 Jun 2016 15:12:28 -0400
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:59053 "EHLO
	bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751573AbcFYTM1 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sat, 25 Jun 2016 15:12:27 -0400
Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2016 21:12:17 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: panxinhui <xinhui@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>,
        Pan Xinhui <xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com, dave@stgolabs.net,
        will.deacon@arm.com, Waiman.Long@hpe.com, benh@kernel.crashing.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] locking/osq: Drop the overload of osq lock
Message-ID: <20160625191217.GO30154@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1466876523-33437-1-git-send-email-xinhui.pan@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <20160625142447.GK30154@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20160625152130.GA2452@insomnia>
 <20160625160922.GL30154@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20160625161307.GZ30927@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <90D0C23D-65D5-40A8-89F1-4D02506A9CBC@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <90D0C23D-65D5-40A8-89F1-4D02506A9CBC@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 01:27:51AM +0800, panxinhui wrote:

> by the way I still think mutex_unlock has a big overload too. 

Do you mean overhead?