From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758139Ab3BFUKr (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Feb 2013 15:10:47 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:18684 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755489Ab3BFUKm (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Feb 2013 15:10:42 -0500 Message-ID: <5112B8A2.8050800@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2013 15:10:10 -0500 From: Rik van Riel User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Michel Lespinasse CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, aquini@redhat.com, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, lwoodman@redhat.com, knoel@redhat.com, chegu_vinod@hp.com, raghavendra.kt@linux.vnet.ibm.com, mingo@redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH -v4 4/5] x86,smp: keep spinlock delay values per hashed spinlock address References: <20130125140553.060b8ced@annuminas.surriel.com> <20130125141842.58010c25@annuminas.surriel.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 01/27/2013 08:04 AM, Michel Lespinasse wrote: > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Rik van Riel wrote: >> + u32 delay = (ent->hash == hash) ? ent->delay : MIN_SPINLOCK_DELAY; > > I still don't like the reseting of delay to MIN_SPINLOCK_DELAY when > there is a hash collision. I've been spending some time looking at this, because I am not a fan either. However, it seems to work and I failed to come up with anything better. Therefore, I have left it as is in the -v5 patch series.