mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pierre Peiffer <pierre.peiffer@bull.net>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com>,
	Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Futex: Revert the non-functional REQUEUE_PI
Date: Mon, 18 Jun 2007 12:58:26 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <46766552.3080803@bull.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1182107470.8176.455.camel@chaos>

Thomas Gleixner wrote :
> Patch d0aa7a70bf03b9de9e995ab272293be1f7937822 titled 
> 
> "futex_requeue_pi optimization"
> 
> introduced user space visible changes to the futex syscall.
> 
> The patch is non-functional and there is no way to fix it proper before
> the 2.6.22 release. 
> 
> The breakage report ( http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/5/12/17 ) went
> unanswered,

Sorry, but I passed lot of time on this last year without any answers or 
comments from the community when I have sent my patches.
Now I'm working on something else and I can't spent more time on this for now... 
Futexes are so complex that it is always difficult to investigate a problem in 
only one or two hours...

> and unfortunately it turned out that the concept is not
> feasible at all. 

Without robust futex, the concept works well, and the performance gain has been 
proven.

It violates the rtmutex semantics badly by introducing
> a virtual owner, which hacks around the coupling of the user-space
> pi_futex and the kernel internal rt_mutex representation.

What you call a hack, is for me a design point. And if this is a hack, then I 
think that we can say that futexes are based on a series of hacks...
But, okay, this is not very constructive, so...

Ulrich Drepper wrote :
 >
 > Indeed.  A lot more discussion is needed to handle this correctly.  No
 > committed code in glibc so far uses the function so removal is no problem.

Once again, it's a pity that people didn't spent time to comment on this when I 
was working on this.
Now, the work will probably just be lost...

-- 
Pierre

  parent reply	other threads:[~2007-06-18 10:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-06-17 19:11 Thomas Gleixner
2007-06-17 19:21 ` Ulrich Drepper
2007-06-18 10:58 ` Pierre Peiffer [this message]
2007-06-18 14:12   ` Ulrich Drepper

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=46766552.3080803@bull.net \
    --to=pierre.peiffer@bull.net \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=drepper@redhat.com \
    --cc=jakub@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.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

Powered by JetHome