From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753223AbdFMAZi (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2017 20:25:38 -0400 Received: from mga07.intel.com ([134.134.136.100]:52861 "EHLO mga07.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752749AbdFMAZh (ORCPT ); Mon, 12 Jun 2017 20:25:37 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.39,335,1493708400"; d="scan'208";a="114060799" Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 17:25:36 -0700 From: Andi Kleen To: Thomas Gleixner Cc: LKML , Bjorn Helgaas , x86@kernel.org, Peter Anvin , Borislav Petkov , Peter Zijlstra , Stephane Eranian Subject: Re: [patch 0/7] x86/pci: Switch to lockless ECAM configuration mode Message-ID: <20170613002536.GA21242@tassilo.jf.intel.com> References: <20170316215002.726697858@linutronix.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170316215002.726697858@linutronix.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.0 (2017-02-23) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 10:50:02PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > Andi reported that the Intel Uncore performance monitoring suffers from the > global pci_lock which protects the generic PCI config space accessors. > > This lock can be removed on X86 because all architecture specific config > space accessors are either serialized by a seperate lock or can be > converted to have their own locking. The mmconfig based access (ECAM) does > not require serialization at the config read/write level because the access > is a simple byte/word/dword read from or write to the memory mapped > configuration space. In that case the lock does not provide any more > protection than the hardware provides already. > > The series converts the CE4100 PCI low level accessors to use the x86 > specific pci_config_lock and implements the switch over to lockless ECAM > configureation space accesors when the system is capable. What's the status of this patch series? The lock contention problem is still there. Thanks, -Andi