From: Waiman Long <waiman.long@hp.com>
To: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@hp.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>,
Scott J Norton <scott.norton@hp.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/7] locking/rwsem: enable reader opt-spinning & writer respin
Date: Fri, 08 Aug 2014 14:16:10 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53E513EA.7010003@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1407455524.2513.10.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net>
On 08/07/2014 07:52 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Thu, 2014-08-07 at 18:26 -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> v1->v2:
>> - Remove patch 1 which changes preempt_enable() to
>> preempt_enable_no_resched().
>> - Remove the RWSEM_READ_OWNED macro and assume readers own the lock
>> when owner is NULL.
>> - Reduce the spin threshold to 64.
> So I still don't like this, and the fact that it is used in some
> virtualization locking bits doesn't really address the concerns about
> arbitrary logic in our general locking code.
As I said in the comments, there is no easy way to figure if all the
readers are running. I set the spin count to a relatively small number
to catch those readers with a short critical sections. For those that
hold the lock for a relatively long time, the spin will end and the task
will be put to sleep. I know the solution is not elegant, but it is
simple. I thought about using more elaborate scheme, but there is no
guarantee that that it will be better than a simple spin count while
greatly complicating the code.
> Also, why did you reduce it from 100 to 64? This very much wants to be
> commented.
In the v1 patch, the 100 spin threshold was for the whole spinning
period. In the v2 patch, I reset the count when a writer is there. There
is why I reduce the spin count a bit.
-Longman
prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-08-08 18:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-08-07 22:26 [PATCH v2 0/7] locking/rwsem: enable reader opt-spinning & writer respin Waiman Long
2014-08-07 22:26 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] locking/rwsem: check for active writer/spinner before wakeup Waiman Long
2014-08-08 0:45 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-08-08 5:39 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-08-08 18:30 ` Waiman Long
2014-08-08 19:03 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-08-10 21:41 ` Waiman Long
2014-08-10 23:50 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-08-11 19:35 ` Waiman Long
2014-08-08 19:50 ` Jason Low
2014-08-08 20:21 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2014-08-08 20:38 ` Jason Low
2014-08-10 21:44 ` Waiman Long
2014-08-07 22:26 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] locking/rwsem: threshold limited spinning for active readers Waiman Long
2014-08-07 22:26 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] locking/rwsem: rwsem_can_spin_on_owner can be called with preemption enabled Waiman Long
2014-08-07 22:26 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] locking/rwsem: more aggressive use of optimistic spinning Waiman Long
2014-08-07 22:26 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] locking/rwsem: move down rwsem_down_read_failed function Waiman Long
2014-08-07 22:26 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] locking/rwsem: enables optimistic spinning for readers Waiman Long
2014-08-07 22:26 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] locking/rwsem: allow waiting writers to go back to spinning Waiman Long
2014-08-07 23:52 ` [PATCH v2 0/7] locking/rwsem: enable reader opt-spinning & writer respin Davidlohr Bueso
2014-08-08 18:16 ` Waiman Long [this message]
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=53E513EA.7010003@hp.com \
--to=waiman.long@hp.com \
--cc=davidlohr@hp.com \
--cc=jason.low2@hp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=scott.norton@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