Re: bisected: futex regression >= 3.14 - was - Slowdown due to threads bouncing between HT cores

[Mike Galbraith <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com>]

On Fri, 2014-10-24 at 17:25 +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: 
> On Wed, 8 Oct 2014, Mike Galbraith wrote:
> > On Wed, 2014-10-08 at 13:04 -0400, Linus Torvalds wrote: 
> > > On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:37 AM, Mike Galbraith
> > > <umgwanakikbuti@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > 11d4616bd07f38d496bd489ed8fad1dc4d928823 is the first bad commit
> > > > commit 11d4616bd07f38d496bd489ed8fad1dc4d928823
> > > > Author: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
> > > > Date:   Thu Mar 20 22:11:17 2014 -0700
> > > >
> > > >     futex: revert back to the explicit waiter counting code
> > > 
> > > While that revert might make things a tiny bit slower (I hated doing
> > > it, but the clever approach sadly didn't work on powerpc and depended
> > > on x86 locking semantics), I seriously doubt it's really relevant.
> > > It's more likely that the *real* problem itself is very
> > > timing-dependent, and the subtle synchronization changes here then
> > > expose it or hide it, rather than really fixing anything.
> > > 
> > > So like Thomas, I would suspect a race condition in the futex use, and
> > > then the exact futex implementation details are just exposing it
> > > incidentally.
> > 
> > Whew, good, futex.c is hard.  Heads up chess guys <punt>. 
> 
> I wonder whether the barrier fix which got into 3.17 late fixes that
> issue as well.

Yes, it did.

-Mike