From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45471) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bLBnR-00041H-0U for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 12:05:07 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bLBnN-0000gB-Q8 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 12:05:00 -0400 Received: from out3-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.27]:59573) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bLBnL-0000dj-C9 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 12:04:57 -0400 Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2016 12:04:39 -0400 From: "Emilio G. Cota" Message-ID: <20160707160439.GA28053@flamenco> References: <1467735496-16256-1-git-send-email-alex.bennee@linaro.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <1467735496-16256-1-git-send-email-alex.bennee@linaro.org> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 0/6] Reduce lock contention on TCG hot-path List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Alex =?iso-8859-1?Q?Benn=E9e?= Cc: mttcg@listserver.greensocs.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, fred.konrad@greensocs.com, a.rigo@virtualopensystems.com, serge.fdrv@gmail.com, bobby.prani@gmail.com, rth@twiddle.net, mark.burton@greensocs.com, pbonzini@redhat.com, jan.kiszka@siemens.com, peter.maydell@linaro.org, claudio.fontana@huawei.com On Tue, Jul 05, 2016 at 17:18:10 +0100, Alex Bennée wrote: > Well this is the first re-spin of the series posted last week. I've > added a bunch of additional patches to be more aggressive with > avoiding bouncing locks but to be honest the numbers don't seem to > make it worth it. How many threads are you using? With just a few threads I wouldn't expect a measurable difference. > I think the first 3 patches are ready to take if the TCG maintainers > want to: > > tcg: Ensure safe tb_jmp_cache lookup out of 'tb_lock' > tcg: set up tb->page_addr before insertion > tcg: cpu-exec: remove tb_lock from the hot-path I think it would be simpler to use tb_lock_recursive and tb_lock_reset, as pointed out in v1 of this series. Thanks, Emilio