From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757817AbcHCSbf (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Aug 2016 14:31:35 -0400 Received: from resqmta-ch2-04v.sys.comcast.net ([69.252.207.36]:41736 "EHLO resqmta-ch2-04v.sys.comcast.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756343AbcHCSbd (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Aug 2016 14:31:33 -0400 Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2016 13:31:30 -0500 (CDT) From: Christoph Lameter X-X-Sender: cl@east.gentwo.org To: Andy Lutomirski cc: Peter Zijlstra , Mathieu Desnoyers , Andrew Morton , Russell King , Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , "H. Peter Anvin" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , linux-api , Paul Turner , Andrew Hunter , Andi Kleen , Dave Watson , Ben Maurer , rostedt , "Paul E. McKenney" , Josh Triplett , Linus Torvalds , Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Michael Kerrisk , Boqun Feng Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v7 1/7] Restartable sequences system call In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <1469135662-31512-1-git-send-email-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> <1469135662-31512-2-git-send-email-mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com> <1806206514.82247.1469502139408.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> <20160803122717.GL6862@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-CMAE-Envelope: MS4wfDpPOnRU/wfENtRrQcF/NFfoh0izc6LEGE4tyc000/Wh94lPpGi9ykQt5yHge+tfOGni88ZHIid8sEK5UWxmEy2C2JqkxQZmr3OtIHNcRgZpq8Ml3yKk 0z4pJxjofVQScEpySZzfdC6/lz1ChydbExZ97ISJP5xiyxtBRp+KKKRl8ejPDts129oajaGzkMytiKFbJ9tgBdk7qqL9ct9uFhnZZeZ9Xx9IiLE1cYVxDFfY l9E0IpqePTD2ztnsxQ21kL+GZyPEJtZNFbSugiAAddo+Rd5ZnpTW4joUlb8zZ7bYQWYWySzsVHLQ9hCKdifFTXLjwOqq5lVa1oEL9rrjDt4AL7zcCxc0QKRV 8CKt77FD/KRlg7EOqLWJWNk+K+N7gJeOhLS7+OsVPOEJI4X8kkzyrpMVk90AFSue7rh+i8RN8BMGV6FEozQzSuPivIyYHA5TTljJuu16v8RWnzKkSUp0zOdJ l0mBq4kssIs4mLHURLDUE7gCAk2IhDDpFdNurt0+M1GT6k8xhpEZLkK9vozNNknerN8aQxHABhzHc/DsWiHbU/1CHezPLStYzS8ATtTYiEXoTgWiDgQJvPgq 29ZDpyGPR9Kz/uX3UyxmTKSgvc7QTN80rqv4zq9yP9khiJQdlkNS6z7hslT4ZYENEfw/bWq1xOm2ZLO6Q/hxQvlHmyISgIoG7C+HM3qHAb7VtTC36Ke8DKFg vw9PFWeQYs2xwP7aXhcF1B1XTWbt/2NDgyaM/Hx5Y8y1R48hcZciZIU6aXyrme80xr6TjpKzwo3TpghBYvu67o9/IhPe6hBDagE3Zgv2H00DfXZl4yqRbpcB ckJOg9zEYsK7i7UDN53B66uOOWqLhqPJjEPoCAQJj1olgtjJzxAwgaBQSgIRtQ== Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 3 Aug 2016, Andy Lutomirski wrote: > > Well, a CMPXCHG without LOCK prefix isn't all that expensive on x86. > > > > It is however on PPC and possibly other architectures, so in name of > > simplicity supporting only the one variant makes sense. > > > > I wouldn't want to depend on CMPXCHG. But imagine we had primitives > that were narrower than the full abort-on-preemption primitive. > Specifically, suppose we had abort if (actual cpu != expected_cpu || > *aptr != aval). We could do things like: > The latency issues that are addressed by restartable sequences require minimim instruction overhead. Lockless CMPXCHG is very important in that area and I would not simply remove it from consideration.