Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] powerpc: queued spinlocks and rwlocks

[Waiman Long]

On 7/8/20 4:41 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 03:57:06PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:
> > Yes, powerpc could certainly get more performance out of the slow
> > paths, and then there are a few parameters to tune.
> Can you clarify? The slow path is already in use on ARM64 which is weak,
> so I doubt there's superfluous serialization present. And Will spend a
> fair amount of time on making that thing guarantee forward progressm, so
> there just isn't too much room to play.
>
> > We don't have a good alternate patching for function calls yet, but
> > that would be something to do for native vs pv.
> Going by your jump_label implementation, support for static_call should
> be fairly straight forward too, no?
>
>    https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200624153024.794671356@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Speaking of static_call, I am also looking forward to it. Do you have an 
idea when that will be merged?

Cheers,
Longman