Re: [PATCH v2] bit_spinlock: introduce smp_cond_load_relaxed

[Gao Xiang]

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
>