Re: [PATCH -v9][RFC] mutex: implement adaptive spinning

[Linus Torvalds]

On Tue, 13 Jan 2009, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> Change mutex contention behaviour such that it will sometimes busy wait on
> acquisition - moving its behaviour closer to that of spinlocks.

Okey, dokey. Looks reasonable, but I wonder if this part came from v8 and 
wasn't intentional:

> +		if (atomic_xchg(&lock->count, -1) == 1) {
> +			lock_acquired(&lock->dep_map, ip);
> +			mutex_set_owner(lock);
> +			preempt_enable();
> +			return 0;
> +		}

Now you're forcing the slow-path on unlock. Maybe it was intentional, 
maybe it wasn't. Did you perhaps mean

	if (atomic_cmpxchg(&lock->count, 1, 0) == 1) {

here? I thought we agreed it was safe, if only because it should be 
equivalent to just having done "mutex_trylock()" instead of a "real" lock 
sequence.

			Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/