* Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 09:07:14PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 06:05:08PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > > So we can as well zap these commits and replace them with the
> > > >
* Frederic Weisbecker fweis...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 09:07:14PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 06:05:08PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
So we can as well zap these commits and replace them with
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 09:07:14PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 06:05:08PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > So we can as well zap these commits and replace them with the
> > > irq_work_on()
> > > conversion (still preparing that).
>
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 09:07:14PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
* Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 06:05:08PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
So we can as well zap these commits and replace them with the
irq_work_on()
conversion (still preparing
* Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 06:05:08PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > So we can as well zap these commits and replace them with the irq_work_on()
> > conversion (still preparing that).
>
> I hear you, but I think Ingo doesn't want to rebase the tree because its
>
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 06:05:08PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> So we can as well zap these commits and replace them with the irq_work_on()
> conversion (still preparing that).
I hear you, but I think Ingo doesn't want to rebase the tree because its
public, but maybe he can make an
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 05:37:36PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 05:29:24PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 05:17:35PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 05:34:08PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > > On Mon, May
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 05:29:24PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 05:17:35PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 05:34:08PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 05:12:28PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > > Note the
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 05:17:35PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 05:34:08PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 05:12:28PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > Note the current ordering:
> > > >
> > > > cmpxchg(>pending, 0, 1) get ipi
>
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 05:34:08PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 05:12:28PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > Note the current ordering:
> > >
> > > cmpxchg(>pending, 0, 1) get ipi
> > > csd_lock(qsd->csd) xchg(>pending, 1)
> > >
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 05:34:08PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 05:12:28PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Note the current ordering:
cmpxchg(qsd-pending, 0, 1) get ipi
csd_lock(qsd-csd) xchg(qsd-pending, 1)
send ipi
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 05:17:35PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 05:34:08PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 05:12:28PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Note the current ordering:
cmpxchg(qsd-pending, 0, 1) get ipi
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 05:29:24PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 05:17:35PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 05:34:08PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 05:12:28PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Note the current
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 05:37:36PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 05:29:24PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 05:17:35PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 05:34:08PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
On Mon, May 05, 2014
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 06:05:08PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
So we can as well zap these commits and replace them with the irq_work_on()
conversion (still preparing that).
I hear you, but I think Ingo doesn't want to rebase the tree because its
public, but maybe he can make an
* Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org wrote:
On Wed, May 07, 2014 at 06:05:08PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
So we can as well zap these commits and replace them with the irq_work_on()
conversion (still preparing that).
I hear you, but I think Ingo doesn't want to rebase the tree
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 05:12:28PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Note the current ordering:
> >
> > cmpxchg(>pending, 0, 1) get ipi
> > csd_lock(qsd->csd) xchg(>pending, 1)
> > send ipi csd_unlock(qsd->csd)
> >
> >
> > So there
> Note the current ordering:
>
> cmpxchg(>pending, 0, 1) get ipi
> csd_lock(qsd->csd) xchg(>pending, 1)
> send ipi csd_unlock(qsd->csd)
>
>
> So there shouldn't be racing updaters. Also ipi sender shouldn't
> race with ipi receiver,
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 04:58:15PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 04:52:59PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > Should we instead do irq_work_queue_on() ?
> >
> > I would really much prefer that yeah. But if we do that, expect some added
> > overhead on the local
> >
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 03:31:13PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 02:37:06PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:40:01AM -0700, tip-bot for Frederic Weisbecker
> > wrote:
> > > Commit-ID: 72aacf0259bb7d53b7a3b5b2f7bf982acaa52b61
> > > Gitweb:
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 04:52:59PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > Should we instead do irq_work_queue_on() ?
>
> I would really much prefer that yeah. But if we do that, expect some added
> overhead on the local
> irq_work_queue() path though. irq_work_raise can't use local cmpxchg ops
>
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 02:37:06PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:40:01AM -0700, tip-bot for Frederic Weisbecker
> wrote:
> > Commit-ID: 72aacf0259bb7d53b7a3b5b2f7bf982acaa52b61
> > Gitweb:
> > http://git.kernel.org/tip/72aacf0259bb7d53b7a3b5b2f7bf982acaa52b61
> >
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 02:37:06PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:40:01AM -0700, tip-bot for Frederic Weisbecker
> wrote:
> > Commit-ID: 72aacf0259bb7d53b7a3b5b2f7bf982acaa52b61
> > Gitweb:
> > http://git.kernel.org/tip/72aacf0259bb7d53b7a3b5b2f7bf982acaa52b61
> >
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:40:01AM -0700, tip-bot for Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Commit-ID: 72aacf0259bb7d53b7a3b5b2f7bf982acaa52b61
> Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/72aacf0259bb7d53b7a3b5b2f7bf982acaa52b61
> Author: Frederic Weisbecker
> AuthorDate: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 21:12:53 +0100
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:40:01AM -0700, tip-bot for Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
Commit-ID: 72aacf0259bb7d53b7a3b5b2f7bf982acaa52b61
Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/72aacf0259bb7d53b7a3b5b2f7bf982acaa52b61
Author: Frederic Weisbecker fweis...@gmail.com
AuthorDate: Tue, 18 Mar 2014
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 02:37:06PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:40:01AM -0700, tip-bot for Frederic Weisbecker
wrote:
Commit-ID: 72aacf0259bb7d53b7a3b5b2f7bf982acaa52b61
Gitweb:
http://git.kernel.org/tip/72aacf0259bb7d53b7a3b5b2f7bf982acaa52b61
Author:
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 02:37:06PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:40:01AM -0700, tip-bot for Frederic Weisbecker
wrote:
Commit-ID: 72aacf0259bb7d53b7a3b5b2f7bf982acaa52b61
Gitweb:
http://git.kernel.org/tip/72aacf0259bb7d53b7a3b5b2f7bf982acaa52b61
Author:
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 04:52:59PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
Should we instead do irq_work_queue_on() ?
I would really much prefer that yeah. But if we do that, expect some added
overhead on the local
irq_work_queue() path though. irq_work_raise can't use local cmpxchg ops
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 03:31:13PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 02:37:06PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 12:40:01AM -0700, tip-bot for Frederic Weisbecker
wrote:
Commit-ID: 72aacf0259bb7d53b7a3b5b2f7bf982acaa52b61
Gitweb:
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 04:58:15PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 04:52:59PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
Should we instead do irq_work_queue_on() ?
I would really much prefer that yeah. But if we do that, expect some added
overhead on the local
Note the current ordering:
cmpxchg(qsd-pending, 0, 1) get ipi
csd_lock(qsd-csd) xchg(qsd-pending, 1)
send ipi csd_unlock(qsd-csd)
So there shouldn't be racing updaters. Also ipi sender shouldn't
race with ipi receiver, the
On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 05:12:28PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Note the current ordering:
cmpxchg(qsd-pending, 0, 1) get ipi
csd_lock(qsd-csd) xchg(qsd-pending, 1)
send ipi csd_unlock(qsd-csd)
So there shouldn't be
32 matches
Mail list logo