that soft lockups
may happen.
Prarit also hit this problem with a smaller Intel box that has 96 cores (192
threads). Maybe he can supply more information of what he had seen.
Cheers,
Longman
-Original Message-
From: Long, Wai Man
Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 2:30 PM
To: Thomas Gle
On 02/19/2016 01:49 PM, Dan Streetman wrote:
> Move __ARCH_SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED definition from qspinlock.h into
> qspinlock_types.h.
>
> The definition of __ARCH_SPIN_LOCK_UNLOCKED comes from the build arch's
> include files; but on x86 when CONFIG_QUEUED_SPINLOCKS is set, it just
> it's defined in
On 02/18/2016 06:58 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 08:31:18PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
>> This patch is a replacement of my previous list batching patch -
>> https://lwn.net/Articles/674105/. Compared with the previous patch,
>> this one provides better performance and fairness.
Davidlohr,
I am sorry that I forgot to put in your tag.
Cheers,
Longman
-Original Message-
From: linux-kernel-ow...@vger.kernel.org
[mailto:linux-kernel-ow...@vger.kernel.org] On Behalf Of Davidlohr Bueso
Sent: Saturday, August 01, 2015 2:01 PM
To: Long, Wai Man
Cc: Peter Zijlstra
On 6/11/2014 6:54 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 11:43:55AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
Enabling this configuration feature causes a slight decrease the
performance of an uncontended lock-unlock operation by about 1-2%
mainly due to the use of a static key. However, uncontended
On 6/11/2014 2:37 PM, Jason Low wrote:
Upon entering the slowpath in __mutex_lock_common(), we try once more to
acquire the mutex. We only try to acquire if (lock->count >= 0). However,
what we actually want here is to try to acquire if the mutex is unlocked
(lock->count == 1).
This patch ch
On 6/11/2014 2:37 PM, Jason Low wrote:
v1->v2:
- There were discussions in v1 about a possible mutex_has_waiters()
function. This patch didn't use that function because the places which
used MUTEX_SHOW_NO_WAITER requires checking for lock->count while an
actual mutex_has_waiters() shoul
On 6/11/2014 5:48 PM, Jason Low wrote:
On Wed, 2014-06-11 at 17:00 -0400, Long, Wai Man wrote:
On 6/9/2014 1:38 PM, Jason Low wrote:
On Wed, 2014-06-04 at 13:58 -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
On Wed, 2014-06-04 at 13:57 -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
In addition, how about the following
On 6/11/2014 6:26 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 11:43:52AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
---
kernel/locking/qspinlock.c | 18 --
1 files changed, 16 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c b/kernel/locking/qspinlock.c
index fc7
On 6/9/2014 1:38 PM, Jason Low wrote:
On Wed, 2014-06-04 at 13:58 -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
On Wed, 2014-06-04 at 13:57 -0700, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:
In addition, how about the following helpers instead:
- mutex_is_unlocked() : count > 0
- mutex_has_waiters() : count < 0, or list_empty(->w
ngman
-Original Message-
From: linus...@gmail.com [mailto:linus...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Linus Torvalds
Sent: Monday, November 18, 2013 1:12 PM
To: Long, Wai Man
Cc: Thomas Gleixner; Ingo Molnar; H. Peter Anvin; Arnd Bergmann;
linux-a...@vger.kernel.org; the arch/x86 maintainers; Linux Kernel Ma
Al,
Thank a lot for quickly locating the bug.
-Longman
-Original Message-
From: Al Viro [mailto:v...@ftp.linux.org.uk] On Behalf Of Al Viro
Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2013 7:40 AM
To: Michael Marineau
Cc: Long, Wai Man; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 3.12 Regression
12 matches
Mail list logo
