lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Mar]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRE: [2.6.25-rc5-mm1][regression] ia64: hackbench doesn't finish>12 hour
Date
From
> Which makes me wonder, why did you ever use a semaphore here? Looking at
> the code its a straight forward mutex. And when you would have used a
> mutex lockdep would have warned about this.

The functionality that we are trying to add is to allow up to N
simultaneous processors to execute the critical region. On current
processors/platforms N=1 so a spinlock or mutex would be fine, but
there will be platforms for which N is a small integer greater than
one. Semaphore initialized to N looked to be the ideal primitive
for this (until Motohiro-san ran the test case that showed the path
where we call this code with a spinlock held).

Next question is whether it is reasonable to get to this code
while holding a spinlock. Isn't this a problem for architectures
that need to use cross-processor interrupts to do a global TLB
shootdown?

-Tony


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-03-20 17:07    [W:0.085 / U:0.140 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site