From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/6] powerpc/64s: implement queued spinlocks and rwlocks Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2020 12:33:38 +0200 Message-ID: <20200709103338.GQ597537@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20200706043540.1563616-1-npiggin@gmail.com> <20200706043540.1563616-5-npiggin@gmail.com> <877dvdvvkm.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <877dvdvvkm.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au> Sender: kvm-ppc-owner@vger.kernel.org To: Michael Ellerman Cc: Nicholas Piggin , linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Will Deacon , Boqun Feng , Ingo Molnar , Waiman Long , Anton Blanchard , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, kvm-ppc@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org List-Id: virtualization@lists.linuxfoundation.org On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 08:20:25PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote: > Nicholas Piggin writes: > > These have shown significantly improved performance and fairness when > > spinlock contention is moderate to high on very large systems. > > > > [ Numbers hopefully forthcoming after more testing, but initial > > results look good ] > > Would be good to have something here, even if it's preliminary. > > > Thanks to the fast path, single threaded performance is not noticably > > hurt. > > > > Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin > > --- > > arch/powerpc/Kconfig | 13 ++++++++++++ > > arch/powerpc/include/asm/Kbuild | 2 ++ > > arch/powerpc/include/asm/qspinlock.h | 25 +++++++++++++++++++++++ > > arch/powerpc/include/asm/spinlock.h | 5 +++++ > > arch/powerpc/include/asm/spinlock_types.h | 5 +++++ > > arch/powerpc/lib/Makefile | 3 +++ > > > include/asm-generic/qspinlock.h | 2 ++ > > Who's ack do we need for that part? Mine I suppose would do, as discussed earlier, it probably isn't required anymore, but I understand the paranoia of not wanting to change too many things at once :-) Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel)