On Mon, Nov 09, 2015 at 11:51:20AM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 11/06/2015 03:37 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >On Fri, Nov 06, 2015 at 12:54:06PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote:
> >>>>+static void pv_wait_node(struct mcs_spinlock *node, struct mcs_spinlock
> >>>>*prev)
> >>>> {
> >>>> struct pv_node *pn = (struct pv_node *)node;
> >>>>+ struct pv_node *pp = (struct pv_node *)prev;
> >>>> int waitcnt = 0;
> >>>> int loop;
> >>>>+ bool wait_early;
> >>>>
> >>>> /* waitcnt processing will be compiled out if !QUEUED_LOCK_STAT
> >>>> */
> >>>> for (;; waitcnt++) {
> >>>>- for (loop = SPIN_THRESHOLD; loop; loop--) {
> >>>>+ for (wait_early = false, loop = SPIN_THRESHOLD; loop; loop--) {
> >>>> if (READ_ONCE(node->locked))
> >>>> return;
> >>>>+ if (pv_wait_early(pp, loop)) {
> >>>>+ wait_early = true;
> >>>>+ break;
> >>>>+ }
> >>>> cpu_relax();
> >>>> }
> >>>>
> >>>So if prev points to another node, it will never see vcpu_running. Was
> >>>that fully intended?
> >>I had added code in pv_wait_head_or_lock to set the state appropriately for
> >>the queue head vCPU.
> >Yes, but that's the head, for nodes we'll always have halted or hashed.
>
> The node state was initialized to be vcpu_running. In pv_wait_node(), it
> will be changed to vcpu_halted before sleeping and back to vcpu_running
> after that. So it is not true that it is either halted or hashed.
Durh,.. I mixed up pv_wait_node() and pv_wait_head() I think. Sorry for
the noise.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
