On 12/19/2014 04:57 PM, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
On Fri, 19 Dec 2014, Khalid Aziz wrote:
The queuing problem caused by a task taking a contended lock just before its
current timeslice is up which userspace app wouldn't know about, is a real
problem nevertheless.
We know that already.
My patch attempts to avoid the contention in the first
place. futex with adaptive spinning is a post-contention solution that tries
to minimize the cost of contention but does nothing to avoid the contention.
I never said that adaptive spinning can solve that problem.
If you would have carefuly read what I wrote, you might have noticed,
that I said:
a proper futex like spin mechanism
Can you spot the subtle difference between that phrase and 'futex with
adaptive spinning'?
Solving this problem using futex can help only if the userspace lock uses
futex.
A really fundamentally new and earth shattering insight.
If you would spend your time to actually digest what maintainers are
telling you, we might make progress on that matter.
But you prefer to spend your time by repeating yourself and providing
completely useless information.
What you are missing completely here is that neither me nor other
maintainers involved care about how you spend your time. But we very
much care about the time WE waste with your behaviour.
I am sorry that you feel the need to continue to resort to personal
attacks even after I made it clear in my last response that I was not
going to pursue this patch. There is no possibility of a productive
discussion of a solution at this point. I hope someone else can find a
solution you find acceptable.
Thanks,
Khalid
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-api" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
