Re: [patch] mutex: optimise generic mutex implementations

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



* Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> Speed up generic mutex implementations.
> 
> - atomic operations which both modify the variable and return something imply
>   full smp memory barriers before and after the memory operations involved
>   (failing atomic_cmpxchg, atomic_add_unless, etc don't imply a barrier because
>   they don't modify the target). See Documentation/atomic_ops.txt.
>   So remove extra barriers and branches.
>   
> - All architectures support atomic_cmpxchg. This has no relation to
>   __HAVE_ARCH_CMPXCHG. We can just take the atomic_cmpxchg path unconditionally
> 
> This reduces a simple single threaded fastpath lock+unlock test from 590 cycles
> to 203 cycles on a ppc970 system.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxx>

no objections here. Lets merge these two patches via the ppc tree, so 
that it gets testing on real hardware as well?

Acked-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Kernel Newbies]     [x86 Platform Driver]     [Netdev]     [Linux Wireless]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux Filesystems]     [Yosemite Discussion]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux