lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Apr]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v9 04/19] qspinlock: Extract out the exchange of tail code word
On 04/18/2014 01:53 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 01:32:47PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>> On 04/18/2014 04:15 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 05:28:17PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>>>> On 04/17/2014 11:49 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>>> On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 11:03:56AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
>>>>>> @@ -192,36 +220,25 @@ void queue_spin_lock_slowpath(struct qspinlock *lock, u32 val)
>>>>>> node->next = NULL;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /*
>>>>>> + * We touched a (possibly) cold cacheline; attempt the trylock once
>>>>>> + * more in the hope someone let go while we weren't watching as long
>>>>>> + * as no one was queuing.
>>>>>> */
>>>>>> + if (!(val& _Q_TAIL_MASK)&& queue_spin_trylock(lock))
>>>>>> + goto release;
>>>>> But you just did a potentially very expensive op; @val isn't
>>>>> representative anymore!
>>>> That is not true. I pass in a pointer to val to trylock_pending() (the
>>>> pointer thing) so that it will store the latest value that it reads from the
>>>> lock back into val. I did miss one in the PV qspinlock exit loop. I will add
>>>> it back when I do the next version.
>>> But you did that read _before_ you touched a cold cacheline, that's 100s
>>> of cycles. Whatever value you read back then is now complete nonsense.
>> For spin_lock(), the lock cacheline is touched by a cmpxchg(). It can takes
>> 100s of cycles whether it is hot or cold.
> Its not the lock cacheline, you just touched the per-cpu node cacheline
> for the first time, setting up the node.
>

Thank for the clarification, now I know what you mean.

-Longman


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-04-18 20:41    [W:0.074 / U:1.348 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site