From: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@hp.com>,
hhuang@redhat.com, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
Subject: [PATCH 0/4] ipc/sem.c: Bug fixes, regression fixes, v3
Date: Sun, 26 May 2013 11:08:51 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1369559335-13491-1-git-send-email-manfred@colorfullife.com> (raw)
I've split my patch into 4 parts:
- 1: Fix-missing-wakeups-in-do_smart_update
- 2: seperate-wait-for-zero-and-alter-tasks
- 3: Always-use-only-one-queue-for-alter-operations
- 4: Rename-try_atomic_semop-to-perform_atomic
Linus:
- Patch 1 should be merged immediately: It fixes bugs,
the current code misses wakeups.
- Patch 2 and 3 restore the behavior of linux <=3.0.9.
I would propose that they are merged, too: I can't rule out that
changing the priority of the wakeups breaks user space apps.
- Patch 4 is trivial, no code changes at all.
If 2+3 are merged, then 4 should be merged, too.
I have tested patch 1 seperately and 1+2+3+4:
With patch 1 applied, there are no more missed wakeups.
With all 4 applied, linux-3.0.10-rc1 behaves as linux <=3.0.9.
With regards to the scalability, I do not expect any degradation:
Operations on seperate semaphores in an array remain parallelized.
Apps that use lots of wait-for-zero semop are probably even faster,
because the wait-for-zero ops are now only scanned if a semval is 0.
--
Manfred
next reply other threads:[~2013-05-26 9:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-26 9:08 Manfred Spraul [this message]
2013-05-26 9:08 ` [PATCH 1/4] ipc/sem.c: Fix missing wakeups in do_smart_update_queue() Manfred Spraul
2013-05-27 17:51 ` Rik van Riel
2013-05-27 19:53 ` Manfred Spraul
2013-05-26 9:08 ` [PATCH 2/4] ipc/sem: seperate wait-for-zero and alter tasks into seperate queues Manfred Spraul
2013-05-27 17:57 ` Rik van Riel
2013-06-01 9:20 ` Manfred Spraul
2013-06-01 10:03 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-06-01 10:05 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-06-01 11:04 ` Mike Galbraith
2013-06-01 11:52 ` Manfred Spraul
2013-05-26 9:08 ` [PATCH 3/4] ipc/sem.c: Always use only one queue for alter operations Manfred Spraul
2013-05-27 18:00 ` Rik van Riel
2013-05-26 9:08 ` [PATCH 4/4] ipc/sem.c: Rename try_atomic_semop() to perform_atomic_semop(), docu update Manfred Spraul
2013-05-27 17:59 ` Rik van Riel
2013-05-26 17:37 ` [PATCH 0/4] ipc/sem.c: Bug fixes, regression fixes, v3 Linus Torvalds
2013-05-26 20:50 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2013-05-26 22:59 ` Linus Torvalds
2013-05-27 15:57 ` Manfred Spraul
2013-05-28 20:37 ` Davidlohr Bueso
2013-05-27 2:04 ` Greg KH
2013-05-27 17:50 ` Rik van Riel
2013-05-27 19:57 ` Greg KH
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=1369559335-13491-1-git-send-email-manfred@colorfullife.com \
--to=manfred@colorfullife.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=davidlohr.bueso@hp.com \
--cc=hhuang@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®