|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
xen-devel
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 13/14] x86/ticketlock: add slowpath logic
To: |
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx> |
Subject: |
[Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 13/14] x86/ticketlock: add slowpath logic |
From: |
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <vatsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Date: |
Fri, 18 Feb 2011 22:33:46 +0530 |
Cc: |
Xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@xxxxxxxxxx>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxxxx>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, vsrivatsa@xxxxxxxxx, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxxxx>, Eric Dumazet <dada1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx>, suzuki@xxxxxxxxxx, Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, Américo Wang <xiyou.wangcong@xxxxxxxxx>, Linux Virtualization <virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
Delivery-date: |
Fri, 18 Feb 2011 10:07:13 -0800 |
Envelope-to: |
www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
In-reply-to: |
<4D3DF5A5.7070301@xxxxxxxx> |
List-help: |
<mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help> |
List-id: |
Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com> |
List-post: |
<mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com> |
List-subscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe> |
List-unsubscribe: |
<http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe> |
References: |
<cover.1289940821.git.jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx> <97ed99ae9160bdb6477284b333bd6708fb7a19cb.1289940821.git.jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx> <20110117152222.GA19233@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20110119162348.GA29900@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4D3DF5A5.7070301@xxxxxxxx> |
Reply-to: |
vatsa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
Sender: |
xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) |
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 01:56:53PM -0800, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
For some reason, I seem to be missing emails from your id/domain and hence had
missed this completely!
> > * bits. However, we need to be careful about this because someone
> > * may just be entering as we leave, and enter the slowpath.
> > */
> > -void __ticket_unlock_release_slowpath(struct arch_spinlock *lock)
> > +void __ticket_unlock_slowpath(struct arch_spinlock *lock)
> > {
> > struct arch_spinlock old, new;
> >
> > BUILD_BUG_ON(((__ticket_t)NR_CPUS) != NR_CPUS);
> >
> > old = ACCESS_ONCE(*lock);
> > -
> > new = old;
> > - new.tickets.head += TICKET_LOCK_INC;
> >
> > /* Clear the slowpath flag */
> > new.tickets.tail &= ~TICKET_SLOWPATH_FLAG;
> > + if (new.tickets.head == new.tickets.tail)
> > + cmpxchg(&lock->head_tail, old.head_tail, new.head_tail);
> >
> > - /*
> > - * If there's currently people waiting or someone snuck in
> > - * since we read the lock above, then do a normal unlock and
> > - * kick. If we managed to unlock with no queued waiters, then
> > - * we can clear the slowpath flag.
> > - */
> > - if (new.tickets.head != new.tickets.tail ||
> > - cmpxchg(&lock->head_tail,
> > - old.head_tail, new.head_tail) != old.head_tail) {
> > - /* still people waiting */
> > - __ticket_unlock_release(lock);
> > - }
> > -
> > + /* Wake up an appropriate waiter */
> > __ticket_unlock_kick(lock, new.tickets.head);
>
> Does the __ticket_unlock_kick need to be unconditional?
I recall having tried optimizing it to be conditional, something along these
lines:
if (new.ticket.head == new.tickets.tail) {
cmpxchg();
} else {
__ticket_unlock_kick(lock, new.tickets.head);
}
but it didn't work for some reason. I left the call unconditional as was the
case previously based on that experiment.
- vatsa
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
|
<Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread> |
- [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 13/14] x86/ticketlock: add slowpath logic,
Srivatsa Vaddagiri <=
|
|
|
|
|