Re: [PATCH/RFC 0/5] cpu_relax: introduce yield, remove lowlatency

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

 



From: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 13:58:53 +0200

> For spinning loops people did often use barrier() or cpu_relax().
> For most architectures cpu_relax and barrier are the same, but on
> some architectures cpu_relax can add some latency. For example on s390
> cpu_relax gives up the time slice to the hypervisor. On power cpu_relax
> tries to give some of the CPU to the neighbor threads. To reduce the
> latency another variant cpu_relax_lowlatency was introduced. Before this
> is used in more and more places, lets revert the logic of provide a new
> function cpu_relax_yield that can spend some time and for s390 yields
> the guest CPU.

Sparc64, fwiw, behaves similarly to powerpc.
--
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