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>,
aswin@hp.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] locking/rwsem: check for active writer/spinner before wakeup
Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 17:41:38 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <53E7E712.9060201@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1407524600.6583.6.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net>
On 08/08/2014 03:03 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-08-08 at 14:30 -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> I have 2 issues about this. First of all, the timing windows between
>> atomic_set() and mutex_has_owner() check is really small, I doubt it
>> will be that effective.
> That is true, which is why I didn't bother showing any performance data
> in the changelog. However, more important than any performance, avoiding
> bogus wakeups is the _right_ thing to do when allowing lock stealing.
>
>> Secondly, I think you may need to call
>> mutex_release() and debug_mutex_unlock() to make the debugging code
>> work, but they seems to be called only under the wait_lock. So I think
>> there is more work that need to be done before this patch is ready.
> When !DEBUG both mutex_release() and debug_mutex_unlock() should be
> no-ops. So this allows us to do the mutex_has_owner() check *without*
> holding the wait_lock.
>
> When DEBUG is set, we don't even bother calling mutex_has_owner(), so
> nothing changes.
>
> I don't understand your concern.
It is true I forgot the fact that MUTEX_SPIN_ON_OWNER is disabled when
DEBUG_MUTEX is on. However, mutex_release is controlled by the LOCKDEP
config variable which is independent of DEBUG_MUTEX. So it is still a
concern.
-Longman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-08-10 21:41 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 [this message]
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
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=53E7E712.9060201@hp.com \
--to=waiman.long@hp.com \
--cc=aswin@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