From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Bongkyu Kim <bongkyu7.kim@samsung.com>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, will@kernel.org, longman@redhat.com,
boqun.feng@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
gregkh@linuxfoundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] Revert "locking/rwsem: Remove reader optimistic spinning"
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2023 17:10:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230904151008.GA25717@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230901010704.18493-2-bongkyu7.kim@samsung.com>
On Fri, Sep 01, 2023 at 10:07:03AM +0900, Bongkyu Kim wrote:
> This reverts commit 617f3ef95177840c77f59c2aec1029d27d5547d6.
>
> In mobile environment, reader optimistic spinning is still useful
> because there're not many readers. In my test result at android device,
> it improves application startup time about 3.8%
> App startup time is most important factor for android user expriences.
> So, re-enable reader optimistic spinning by this commit. And,
> the later patch will make it optional feature by cmdline.
I'm not seeing any mention on how this interacts with all the rwsem work
that has been done since that commit, like the handoff rework.
Why is a straight revert a sane thing at this point?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-09-04 15:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <CGME20230901010734epcas2p4aadced02d68d3db407fda23de34601d2@epcas2p4.samsung.com>
2023-09-01 1:07 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] Make reader optimistic spinning optional Bongkyu Kim
2023-09-01 1:07 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] Revert "locking/rwsem: Remove reader optimistic spinning" Bongkyu Kim
2023-09-04 15:10 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2023-09-04 19:11 ` Ingo Molnar
2023-09-04 19:56 ` Waiman Long
2023-09-06 11:27 ` Bongkyu Kim
2023-09-06 13:32 ` Waiman Long
2023-09-20 4:09 ` Bongkyu Kim
2023-09-01 1:07 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] locking/rwsem: Make reader optimistic spinning optional Bongkyu Kim
2023-09-04 15:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2024-04-02 23:46 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] " John Stultz
2024-04-03 1:21 ` Bongkyu Kim
2024-04-03 1:27 ` John Stultz
2024-04-03 1:42 ` Bongkyu Kim
2024-04-04 17:44 ` Waiman Long
2024-04-05 3:06 ` Waiman Long
2024-04-05 6:37 ` Bongkyu Kim
2024-04-05 6:51 ` Bongkyu Kim
2024-04-08 8:15 ` xieliujie
2024-04-09 0:50 ` Bongkyu Kim
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=20230904151008.GA25717@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=bongkyu7.kim@samsung.com \
--cc=boqun.feng@gmail.com \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=longman@redhat.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=will@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