On 03/03/13 01:06, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> On 03/02, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
>>
>> My version would be slower if it needs to take the
>> slow path in a reentrant way, but I'm not sure it matters either :)
>
> I'd say, this doesn't matter at all, simply because this can only happen
> if we race with the active writer.
>
It can also happen when interrupted. (still very rarely)
arch_spin_trylock()
------->interrupted,
__this_cpu_read() returns 0.
arch_spin_trylock() fails
slowpath, any nested will be slowpath too.
...
..._read_unlock()
<-------interrupt
__this_cpu_inc()
....
I saw get_online_cpu_atomic() is called very frequent.
And the above thing happens in one CPU rarely, but how often it
happens in the whole system if we have 4096 CPUs?
(I worries to much. I tend to remove FALLBACK_BASE now, we should
add it only after we proved we needed it, this part is not proved)
Thanks,
Lai
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
