From: Waiman Long <waiman.long@hpe.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Ding Tianhong <dingtianhong@huawei.com>,
Jason Low <jason.low2@hpe.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@us.ibm.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Will Deacon <Will.Deacon@arm.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] locking/mutex: Enable optimistic spinning of woken task in wait queue
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2016 16:40:30 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56FD8B3E.3000306@hpe.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160329164233.GB11035@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 03/29/2016 12:42 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 29, 2016 at 05:39:35PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 01:46:43PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>>> Ding Tianhong reported a live-lock situation where a constant stream
>>> of incoming optimistic spinners blocked a task in the wait list from
>>> getting the mutex.
>>>
>>> This patch attempts to fix this live-lock condition by enabling the
>>> woken task in the wait queue to enter into an optimistic spinning
>>> loop itself in parallel with the regular spinners in the OSQ. This
>>> should prevent the live-lock condition from happening.
>> I would very much like a few words on how fairness is preserved.
>>
>> Because while the waiter remains on the wait_list while it spins, and
>> therefore unlock()s will only wake it, and we'll only contend with the
>> one waiter, the fact that we have two spinners is not fair or starvation
>> proof at all.
> Alternatively, we can say this is good enough until proven deficient,
> but then we should still very much document this.
Yes, we can certainly do that.
Cheers,
Longman
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-31 20:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-22 17:46 [PATCH v3 0/3] locking/mutex: Enable optimistic spinning of lock waiter Waiman Long
2016-03-22 17:46 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] locking/mutex: Add waiter parameter to mutex_optimistic_spin() Waiman Long
2016-03-22 17:46 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] locking/mutex: Enable optimistic spinning of woken task in wait queue Waiman Long
2016-03-29 15:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-03-29 16:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-03-31 20:40 ` Waiman Long [this message]
2016-03-31 20:37 ` Waiman Long
2016-03-22 17:46 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] locking/mutex: Avoid missed wakeup of mutex waiter Waiman Long
2016-03-29 16:36 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-03-31 20:39 ` Waiman Long
2016-07-18 17:59 ` [PATCH v3 0/3] locking/mutex: Enable optimistic spinning of lock waiter Jason Low
2016-07-18 20:50 ` 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=56FD8B3E.3000306@hpe.com \
--to=waiman.long@hpe.com \
--cc=Will.Deacon@arm.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=dingtianhong@huawei.com \
--cc=jason.low2@hpe.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@us.ibm.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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