Re: [PATCH v2] locking/rwsem: reduce spinlock contention in wakeup after up_read/up_write

[Waiman Long]

On 04/23/2015 05:31 PM, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> It would be nice to not run into this by accident. Please CC all
> relevant parties ;)
>
> On Thu, 2015-04-23 at 14:24 -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> > In up_read()/up_write(), rwsem_wake() will be called whenever it
> > detects that some writers/readers are waiting. The rwsem_wake()
> > function will take the wait_lock and call __rwsem_do_wake() to do
> > the real wakeup.  This can be a problem especially for up_read()
> > where many readers can potentially call rwsem_wake() at more or less
> > the same time even though a single call should be enough. This will
> > cause contention in the wait_lock cacheline resulting in delay of
> > the up_read/up_write operations.
> Ok.
>
> > This patch makes the wait_lock taking and the call to __rwsem_do_wake()
> > optional if at least one spinning writer is present.
> But if the lock is taken by readers, like you suggest above, there
> cannot be any active spinners. We always block in these cases.

Yes, you are right. Will fix the log message.

Cheers,
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/