Re: [PATCH] locking: Generic ticket lock

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

 



On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 03:49:51PM +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 3:05 PM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > Therefore provide ticket locks, which depend on a single atomic
> > operation (fetch_add) while still providing fairness.
> 
> Nice!
> 
> Aside from the qspinlock vs ticket-lock question, can you describe the
> tradeoffs between this generic ticket lock and a custom implementation
> in architecture code? Should we convert most architectures over
> to the generic code in the long run, or is there something they
> can usually do better with an inline asm based ticket lock

I think for a load-store arch this thing should generate pretty close to
optimal code. x86 can do ticket_unlock() slightly better using a single
INCW (or ADDW 1) on the owner subword, where this implementation will to
separate load-add-store instructions.

If that is actually measurable is something else entirely.

> or a trivial test-and-set?

If your SMP arch is halfway sane (no fwd progress issues etc..) then
ticket should behave well and avoid the starvation/variablilty of TaS
lock.

The big exception there is virtualized architectures, ticket is
absolutely horrendous for 'guests' (any fair lock is for that matter).




[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