On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 05:59:50PM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
> 49a7d46a06c3 (powerpc: Implement smp_cond_load_relaxed()) added
> busy-waiting pausing with a preferred SMT priority pattern, lowering
> the priority (reducing decode cycles) during the whole loop slowpath.
> 
> However, data shows that while this pattern works well with simple
                                              ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> spinlocks, queued spinlocks benefit more being kept in medium priority,
> with a cpu_relax() instead, being a low+medium combo on powerpc.
...
> 
> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h 
> b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h
> index aecfde829d5d..7ae29cfb06c0 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h
> @@ -80,22 +80,6 @@ do {                                                       
>                 \
>       ___p1;                                                          \
>  })
>  
> -#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64
Maybe it should be kept for the simple spinlock case then?

Thanks

Michal
> -#define smp_cond_load_relaxed(ptr, cond_expr) ({             \
> -     typeof(ptr) __PTR = (ptr);                              \
> -     __unqual_scalar_typeof(*ptr) VAL;                       \
> -     VAL = READ_ONCE(*__PTR);                                \
> -     if (unlikely(!(cond_expr))) {                           \
> -             spin_begin();                                   \
> -             do {                                            \
> -                     VAL = READ_ONCE(*__PTR);                \
> -             } while (!(cond_expr));                         \
> -             spin_end();                                     \
> -     }                                                       \
> -     (typeof(*ptr))VAL;                                      \
> -})
> -#endif
> -
>  #ifdef CONFIG_PPC_BOOK3S_64
>  #define NOSPEC_BARRIER_SLOT   nop
>  #elif defined(CONFIG_PPC_FSL_BOOK3E)
> -- 
> 2.26.2
> 

Reply via email to