LKML Archive on lore.kernel.org
help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Cc: Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Refactoring mutex spin on owner code
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2015 08:51:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150130075140.GS2896@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1422602080.2005.9.camel@stgolabs.net>
On Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 11:14:40PM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> > +bool mutex_spin_on_owner(struct mutex *lock, struct task_struct *owner)
> > {
> > + bool ret;
> > +
> > rcu_read_lock();
> > - while (owner_running(lock, owner)) {
> > - if (need_resched())
> > + while (true) {
> > + /* Return success when the lock owner changed */
> > + if (lock->owner != owner) {
>
> Shouldn't this be a READ_ONCE(lock->owner)? We're in a loop and need to
> avoid gcc giving us stale data if the owner is updated after a few
> iterations, no?
There's a barrier() in that loop, and cpu_relax() also implies
barrier(). I'm pretty sure that's more than sufficient to make GCC emit
loads.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-01-30 7:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-01-26 7:36 [PATCH -tip 0/6] rwsem: Fine tuning Davidlohr Bueso
2015-01-26 7:36 ` [PATCH 1/6] locking/rwsem: Use task->state helpers Davidlohr Bueso
2015-02-04 14:38 ` [tip:locking/core] " tip-bot for Davidlohr Bueso
2015-01-26 7:36 ` [PATCH 2/6] locking/rwsem: Document barrier need when waking tasks Davidlohr Bueso
2015-01-27 17:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-01-27 20:30 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-01-26 7:36 ` [PATCH 3/6] locking/rwsem: Set lock ownership ASAP Davidlohr Bueso
2015-01-27 17:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-01-27 19:18 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-01-26 7:36 ` [PATCH 4/6] locking/rwsem: Avoid deceiving lock spinners Davidlohr Bueso
2015-01-27 17:23 ` Jason Low
2015-01-28 3:54 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-01-28 17:01 ` Tim Chen
2015-01-28 21:03 ` Jason Low
2015-01-29 1:10 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-01-29 20:13 ` Jason Low
2015-01-29 20:18 ` Jason Low
2015-01-29 23:15 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-01-30 1:52 ` Refactoring mutex spin on owner code Jason Low
2015-01-30 7:14 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-01-30 7:51 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2015-01-26 7:36 ` [PATCH 5/6] locking/rwsem: Optimize slowpath/sleeping Davidlohr Bueso
2015-01-27 17:34 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-01-27 21:57 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2015-01-26 7:36 ` [PATCH 6/6] locking/rwsem: Check for active lock before bailing on spinning Davidlohr Bueso
2015-01-27 18:11 ` Jason Low
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=20150130075140.GS2896@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=jason.low2@hp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
--cc=walken@google.com \
--subject='Re: Refactoring mutex spin on owner code' \
/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
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).