From: Gao Xiang <gaoxiang25@huawei.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>,
Philippe Ombredanne <pombredanne@nexb.com>,
Kate Stewart <kstewart@linuxfoundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Miao Xie <miaoxie@huawei.com>,
Chao Yu <chao@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] bit_spinlock: introduce smp_cond_load_relaxed
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2018 20:38:10 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <44213253-d108-cd63-db64-7d41fcd8af66@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cd305483-97f3-6935-65d6-d5de47cdfcd7@huawei.com>
Hi Peter,
OK, I think I understand your point. If you think the performance of bit_spinlock
doesn't matter, Let's keep the current status.
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
On 2018/11/6 20:33, Gao Xiang wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On 2018/11/6 20:27, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 06, 2018 at 07:36:41PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:
>>> IMO, to use wrapped up function for the detailed scenario could be better than
>>> open-coded all the time (eg. do cpu_relax(); while(...)) since it could be
>>> optimizated even more for the specific architecture...
>> That's the whole point though; if this actually matters, you're doing it
>> wrong.
>
> I cannot fully understand your point...Sorry about my English...
>
> To the point, you mean it is much better to fix it as Will suggested before or
> leave the matter as it is since the performance of bit_spinlock itself doesn't matter?
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Thanks,
> Gao Xiang
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-11-06 12:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-10-13 6:47 [RFC PATCH] bit_spinlock: introduce smp_cond_load_relaxed Gao Xiang
2018-10-13 7:04 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-10-13 7:22 ` Gao Xiang
2018-10-13 7:30 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2018-10-13 7:44 ` Gao Xiang
2018-10-13 7:30 ` Gao Xiang
2018-10-30 6:04 ` [PATCH v2] " Gao Xiang
2018-10-30 5:52 ` Gao Xiang
2018-11-05 17:11 ` Gao Xiang
2018-11-05 22:49 ` Will Deacon
2018-11-06 1:45 ` Gao Xiang
2018-11-06 9:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-11-06 10:22 ` Gao Xiang
2018-11-06 11:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-11-06 11:36 ` Gao Xiang
2018-11-06 12:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-11-06 12:33 ` Gao Xiang
2018-11-06 12:38 ` Gao Xiang [this message]
2018-11-06 12:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=44213253-d108-cd63-db64-7d41fcd8af66@huawei.com \
--to=gaoxiang25@huawei.com \
--cc=chao@kernel.org \
--cc=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=kstewart@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=miaoxie@huawei.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pombredanne@nexb.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).