Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Switch arm64 over to qrwlock

2017-10-10 Thread Adam Wallis
On 10/6/2017 9:34 AM, Will Deacon wrote: > Hi all, > > This is version two of the patches I posted yesterday: > > > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2017-October/534666.html > > I'd normally leave it longer before posting again, but Peter had a good > suggestion to rework

Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Switch arm64 over to qrwlock

2017-10-09 Thread Jeremy Linton
Hi, On 10/06/2017 08:34 AM, Will Deacon wrote: Hi all, This is version two of the patches I posted yesterday: http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2017-October/534666.html I'd normally leave it longer before posting again, but Peter had a good suggestion to rework the lay

Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Switch arm64 over to qrwlock

2017-10-09 Thread Waiman Long
On 10/06/2017 09:34 AM, Will Deacon wrote: > Hi all, > > This is version two of the patches I posted yesterday: > > > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2017-October/534666.html > > I'd normally leave it longer before posting again, but Peter had a good > suggestion to rework

Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Switch arm64 over to qrwlock

2017-10-09 Thread Will Deacon
On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 03:49:21PM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 10:59:36AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 12:30:52AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > > > There were 2 preparing patches in the series: > > > [PATCH 1/3] kernel/locking: #include in qrwlock > >

Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Switch arm64 over to qrwlock

2017-10-09 Thread Yury Norov
On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 10:59:36AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > Hi Yury, > > On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 12:30:52AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 02:34:37PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > > > This is version two of the patches I posted yesterday: > > > > > > > > > http://lists.i

Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Switch arm64 over to qrwlock

2017-10-09 Thread Will Deacon
On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 08:52:43AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 12:30:52AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > > The bottomline of discussion [1] was that queued locks are more > > effective when SoC has many CPUs. And 4 is not many. > > qspinlock, yes. qrwlock not, as it fully de

Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Switch arm64 over to qrwlock

2017-10-09 Thread Will Deacon
Hi Yury, On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 12:30:52AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 02:34:37PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > > This is version two of the patches I posted yesterday: > > > > > > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2017-October/534666.html > > > > I'd

Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Switch arm64 over to qrwlock

2017-10-08 Thread Peter Zijlstra
On Mon, Oct 09, 2017 at 12:30:52AM +0300, Yury Norov wrote: > The bottomline of discussion [1] was that queued locks are more > effective when SoC has many CPUs. And 4 is not many. qspinlock, yes. qrwlock not, as it fully depends on arch_spinlock_t for the queueing. qrwlock is just a generic rwloc

Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Switch arm64 over to qrwlock

2017-10-08 Thread Yury Norov
On Fri, Oct 06, 2017 at 02:34:37PM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > Hi all, > > This is version two of the patches I posted yesterday: > > > http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-arm-kernel/2017-October/534666.html > > I'd normally leave it longer before posting again, but Peter had a good >