From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Jason Low <jason.low2@hpe.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
imre.deak@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Jason Low <jason.low2@hp.com>, Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@hpe.com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>,
Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com>,
terry.rudd@hpe.com, "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] locking/mutex: Prevent lock starvation when spinning is enabled
Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2016 16:27:35 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160818142735.GB10121@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1470854648.17361.9.camel@j-VirtualBox>
On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 11:44:08AM -0700, Jason Low wrote:
> @@ -556,8 +604,12 @@ __mutex_lock_common(struct mutex *lock, long state, unsigned int subclass,
> * other waiters. We only attempt the xchg if the count is
> * non-negative in order to avoid unnecessary xchg operations:
> */
> - if (atomic_read(&lock->count) >= 0 &&
> + if ((!need_yield_to_waiter(lock) || wakeups > 1) &&
> + atomic_read(&lock->count) >= 0 &&
> (atomic_xchg_acquire(&lock->count, -1) == 1))
> + if (wakeups > 1)
> + clear_yield_to_waiter(lock);
> +
> break;
>
> /*
There's some { } gone missing there...
Also, I think I'll change it to avoid that extra wakeups > 1 condition..
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-18 14:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-10 18:44 Jason Low
2016-08-10 20:00 ` kbuild test robot
2016-08-10 20:01 ` kbuild test robot
2016-08-16 20:19 ` Jason Low
2016-08-10 22:07 ` Jason Low
2016-08-11 2:30 ` Jason Low
2016-08-11 15:40 ` Waiman Long
2016-08-16 19:44 ` Jason Low
2016-08-17 1:41 ` Wanpeng Li
2016-08-17 18:30 ` Jason Low
2016-08-18 0:38 ` Wanpeng Li
2016-08-18 14:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-18 15:22 ` Waiman Long
2016-08-18 14:27 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2016-08-18 15:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-08-18 15:30 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20160818142735.GB10121@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=Waiman.Long@hpe.com \
--cc=dave@stgolabs.net \
--cc=imre.deak@intel.com \
--cc=jason.low2@hp.com \
--cc=jason.low2@hpe.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulmck@us.ibm.com \
--cc=terry.rudd@hpe.com \
--cc=tim.c.chen@linux.intel.com \
/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®