Re: [Patch V3 0/3] Enable irqs when waiting for rwlocks

[Andrew Morton]

On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 06:24:05 -0600
holt@xxxxxxx wrote:

> New in V3:
>  * Handle rearrangement of some arch's include/asm directories.
> 
> New in V2:
>  * get rid of ugly #ifdef's in kernel/spinlock.h
>  * convert __raw_{read|write}_lock_flags to an inline func
> 
> SGI has observed that on large systems, interrupts are not serviced for
> a long period of time when waiting for a rwlock. The following patch
> series re-enables irqs while waiting for the lock, resembling the code
> which is already there for spinlocks.
> 
> I only made the ia64 version, because the patch adds some overhead to
> the fast path. I assume there is currently no demand to have this for
> other architectures, because the systems are not so large. Of course,
> the possibility to implement raw_{read|write}_lock_flags for any
> architecture is still there.
> 

The patches seem reasonable.  I queued all three with the intention of
merging #1 and #2 into 2.6.29.  At that stage, architectures can decide
whether or not they want to do this.  I shall then spam Tony with #3 so
you can duke it out with him.

It's a bit regrettable to have different architectures behaving in
different ways.  It would be interesting to toss an x86_64
implementation into the grinder, see if it causes any problems, see if
it produces any tangible benefits.  Then other architectures might
follow.  Or not, depending on the results ;)

--
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/