On Tue, Jun 17, 2014 at 04:36:15PM -0400, Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 02:47:00PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Because the qspinlock needs to touch a second cacheline; add a pending
> > bit and allow a single in-word spinner before we punt to the second
> > cacheline.
>
> Could you add this in the description please:
>
> And by second cacheline we mean the local 'node'. That is the:
> mcs_nodes[0] and mcs_nodes[idx]
Those should be the very same cacheline :), but yes, I can add something
like that.
> Perhaps it might be better then to split this in the header file
> as this is trying to not be a slowpath code - but rather - a
> pre-slow-path-lets-try-if-we can do another cmpxchg in case
> the unlocker has just unlocked itself.
>
> So something like:
>
> diff --git a/include/asm-generic/qspinlock.h b/include/asm-generic/qspinlock.h
> index e8a7ae8..29cc9c7 100644
> --- a/include/asm-generic/qspinlock.h
> +++ b/include/asm-generic/qspinlock.h
> @@ -75,11 +75,21 @@ extern void queue_spin_lock_slowpath(struct qspinlock *lock, u32 val);
> */
> static __always_inline void queue_spin_lock(struct qspinlock *lock)
> {
> - u32 val;
> + u32 val, new;
>
> val = atomic_cmpxchg(&lock->val, 0, _Q_LOCKED_VAL);
> if (likely(val == 0))
> return;
> +
> + /* One more attempt - but if we fail mark it as pending. */
> + if (val == _Q_LOCKED_VAL) {
> + new = Q_LOCKED_VAL |_Q_PENDING_VAL;
> +
> + old = atomic_cmpxchg(&lock->val, val, new);
> + if (old == _Q_LOCKED_VAL) /* YEEY! */
> + return;
> + val = old;
> + }
> queue_spin_lock_slowpath(lock, val);
> }
I think that's too big for an inline function.
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
