> 在 2016年6月26日,03:12,Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> 写道: > > On Sun, Jun 26, 2016 at 01:27:51AM +0800, panxinhui wrote: > >> by the way I still think mutex_unlock has a big overload too. > > Do you mean overhead? > oh, maybe you are right. mutex_unlock ’s implementation uses inc_return variant on ppc, and that’s expensive. I am thinking of using cmpxchg instead.
- [PATCH] locking/osq: Drop the overload of osq lock Pan Xinhui
- Re: [PATCH] locking/osq: Drop the overload of osq lock Peter Zijlstra
- Re: [PATCH] locking/osq: Drop the overload of osq ... Boqun Feng
- Re: [PATCH] locking/osq: Drop the overload of ... Peter Zijlstra
- Re: [PATCH] locking/osq: Drop the overload... Peter Zijlstra
- Re: [PATCH] locking/osq: Drop the ove... panxinhui
- Re: [PATCH] locking/osq: Drop the... Peter Zijlstra
- Re: [PATCH] locking/osq: Drop... panxinhui
- Re: [PATCH] locking/osq: Drop... Peter Zijlstra
- Re: [PATCH] locking/osq: Drop... xinhui
- Re: [PATCH] locking/osq: Drop the overload... Boqun Feng
- Re: [PATCH] locking/osq: Drop the ove... Peter Zijlstra
- Re: [PATCH] locking/osq: Drop the overload of ... Peter Zijlstra
- Re: [PATCH] locking/osq: Drop the overload... Boqun Feng
- Re: [PATCH] locking/osq: Drop the ove... panxinhui
- Re: [PATCH] locking/osq: Drop the... Peter Zijlstra
- Re: [PATCH] locking/osq: Drop... Peter Zijlstra
- Re: [PATCH] locking/osq: Drop... Boqun Feng