From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: fenghua.yu@intel.com
Cc: michael.chan@broadcom.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
tglx@linutronix.de, luto@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
tony.luck@intel.com, David.Laight@ACULAB.COM,
ravi.v.shankar@intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] drivers/net/b44: Change to non-atomic bit operations
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2019 18:23:07 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191224.182307.2303352806218314412.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191225011020.GE241295@romley-ivt3.sc.intel.com>
From: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2019 17:10:20 -0800
> On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 04:18:26PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@intel.com>
>> Date: Fri, 20 Dec 2019 15:29:11 -0800
>>
>> > On x86, accessing data across two cache lines in one atomic bit
>> > operation (aka split lock) can take over 1000 cycles.
>>
>> This happens during configuration of WOL, nobody cares that the atomic
>> operations done in this function take 1000 cycles each.
>>
>> I'm not applying this patch. It is gratuitous, and the commit message
>> talks about "performance" considuations (cycle counts) that completely
>> don't matter here.
>>
>> If you are merely just arbitrarily trying to remove locked atomic
>> operations across the tree for it's own sake, then you should be
>> completely honest about that in your commit message.
>
> We are enabling split lock in the kernel (by default):
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/12/12/1129
>
> After applying the split lock detection patch, the set_bit() in b44.c
> may cause split lock and kernel dies.
>
> So should I change the commit message to add the above info?
You're asking me if you should make your commit message accurate?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-25 2:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-20 23:29 [PATCH] drivers/net/b44: Change to non-atomic bit operations Fenghua Yu
2019-12-25 0:18 ` David Miller
2019-12-25 1:10 ` Fenghua Yu
2019-12-25 2:23 ` David Miller [this message]
2020-01-02 21:27 ` [Patch v2] drivers/net/b44: Change to non-atomic bit operations on pwol_mask Luck, Tony
2020-01-05 22:22 ` David Miller
2019-12-25 20:24 ` [PATCH] drivers/net/b44: Change to non-atomic bit operations Stephen Hemminger
2020-01-02 18:22 ` Luck, Tony
2020-01-03 8:47 ` David Laight
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=20191224.182307.2303352806218314412.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=David.Laight@ACULAB.COM \
--cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
--cc=luto@kernel.org \
--cc=michael.chan@broadcom.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=ravi.v.shankar@intel.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.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).