Re: [PATCH v2 1/7] locking/rwsem: check for active writer/spinner before wakeup

[Waiman Long]

On 08/08/2014 03:03 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> On Fri, 2014-08-08 at 14:30 -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> > I have 2 issues about this. First of all, the timing windows between
> > atomic_set() and mutex_has_owner() check is really small, I doubt it
> > will be that effective.
> That is true, which is why I didn't bother showing any performance data
> in the changelog. However, more important than any performance, avoiding
> bogus wakeups is the _right_ thing to do when allowing lock stealing.
>
> > Secondly, I think you may need to call
> > mutex_release() and debug_mutex_unlock() to make the debugging code
> > work, but they seems to be called only under the wait_lock. So I think
> > there is more work that need to be done before this patch is ready.
> When !DEBUG both mutex_release() and debug_mutex_unlock() should be
> no-ops. So this allows us to do the mutex_has_owner() check *without*
> holding the wait_lock.
>
> When DEBUG is set, we don't even bother calling mutex_has_owner(), so
> nothing changes.
>
> I don't understand your concern.

It is true I forgot the fact that MUTEX_SPIN_ON_OWNER is disabled when 
DEBUG_MUTEX is on. However, mutex_release is controlled by the LOCKDEP 
config variable which is independent of DEBUG_MUTEX. So it is still a 
concern.

-Longman
--
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/