Re: [RFC -v3 PATCH 2/3] sched: add yield_to function

[KOSAKI Motohiro]

> On 01/05/2011 04:39 AM, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > >  On 01/04/2011 08:14 AM, KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > >  >  Also, If pthread_cond_signal() call sys_yield_to imlicitly, we can
> > >  >  avoid almost Nehalem (and other P2P cache arch) lock unfairness
> > >  >  problem. (probaby creating pthread_condattr_setautoyield_np or similar
> > >  >  knob is good one)
> > >
> > >  Often, the thread calling pthread_cond_signal() wants to continue
> > >  executing, not yield.
> >
> > Then, it doesn't work.
> >
> > After calling pthread_cond_signal(), T1 which cond_signal caller and T2
> > which waked start to GIL grab race. But usually T1 is always win because
> > lock variable is in T1's cpu cache. Why kernel and userland have so much
> > different result? One of a reason is glibc doesn't have any ticket lock scheme.
> >
> > If you are interesting GIL mess and issue, please feel free to ask more.
> 
> I suggest looking into an explicit round-robin scheme, where each thread 
> adds itself to a queue and an unlock wakes up the first waiter.

I'm sure you haven't try your scheme. but I did. It's slow.



--
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/