From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1752452AbbJMT4f (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:56:35 -0400
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:42590 "EHLO
	bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752156AbbJMT4e (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:56:34 -0400
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 21:56:27 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hpe.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Scott J Norton <scott.norton@hpe.com>,
        Douglas Hatch <doug.hatch@hpe.com>,
        Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 4/5] locking/pvqspinlock: Allow 1 lock stealing attempt
Message-ID: <20151013195627.GY3816@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1442955044-43895-1-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hpe.com>
 <1442955044-43895-5-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hpe.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1442955044-43895-5-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hpe.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Sep 22, 2015 at 04:50:43PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:

> +gotlock:
>  	/*
> +	 * We now have the lock. We need to either clear the tail code or
> +	 * notify the next one in queue as the new queue head.
>  	 */
> +	old = atomic_read(&lock->val);
> +	while ((old & _Q_TAIL_MASK) == tail) {
> +		int val;
> +		int new = old & ~_Q_TAIL_MASK;
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * We are the only one in the queue, so clear the tail code
> +		 * and return.
> +		 */
> +		val = atomic_cmpxchg(&lock->val, old, new);
> +		if (old == val)
> +			goto done;
> +		old = val;
> +	}
> +

This i need to think about a wee bit; its almost the same...


So the below is exactly duplicated from the normal slowpath, so why
don't you keep that there?

It would get you something like:

	if (pv_wait_head_or_steal(..))
		goto stolen;


stolen:
> +	/*
> +	 * contended path; wait for next, release.
> +	 */
> +	while (!(next = READ_ONCE(node->next)))
> +		cpu_relax();
> +
> +	arch_mcs_spin_unlock_contended(&next->locked);
> +	pv_kick_node(lock, next);

release:
	...