lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Jun]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/4, v2] x86: enlightenment for ticket spin locks - Xen implementation
>>> On 30.06.10 at 16:25, Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org> wrote:
> On 06/30/2010 04:03 PM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>> Afaics the unlock still involves a function call *in all cases* with
>> pvops spinlocks, whereas it's a single inline instruction without.
>>
>
> No. The unlock path can see if there are any further waiters by looking
> at the ticket in the, and only do the kick call if there are some.

Are we perhaps talking about different things? I'm referring to

static __always_inline void arch_spin_unlock(struct arch_spinlock *lock)
{
PVOP_VCALL1(pv_lock_ops.spin_unlock, lock);
}

which is an indirect call which, as I understand it, gets replaced
with a direct one at runtime. But it remains to be a call (as opposed
to being a single inc instructions without CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS).

Jan



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-06-30 16:39    [W:0.039 / U:1.768 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site