| [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
 Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v9 05/19] qspinlock: Optimize for smaller	NR_CPUS
 
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>From: Waiman Long <waiman.long@xxxxxx>Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 17:46:27 -0400Cc: linux-arch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,	Raghavendra K T <raghavendra.kt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,	Gleb Natapov <gleb@xxxxxxxxxx>, kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,	Scott J Norton <scott.norton@xxxxxx>, x86@xxxxxxxxxx,	Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@xxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,	virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,	Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxxxxx>, Chegu Vinod <chegu_vinod@xxxxxx>,	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@xxxxxxxxxx>,	"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>,	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,	Oleg Nesterov <oleg@xxxxxxxxxx>Delivery-date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 21:47:05 +0000List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xen.org> 
 
On 04/17/2014 11:56 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
 
On Thu, Apr 17, 2014 at 11:03:57AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
 
+struct __qspinlock {
+       union {
+               atomic_t val;
+               struct {
+#ifdef __LITTLE_ENDIAN
+                       u16     locked_pending;
+                       u16     tail;
+#else
+                       u16     tail;
+                       u16     locked_pending;
+#endif
+               };
+       };
+};
+
+/**
+ * clear_pending_set_locked - take ownership and clear the pending bit.
+ * @lock: Pointer to queue spinlock structure
+ * @val : Current value of the queue spinlock 32-bit word
+ *
+ * *,1,0 ->  *,0,1
+ */
+static __always_inline void
+clear_pending_set_locked(struct qspinlock *lock, u32 val)
+{
+       struct __qspinlock *l = (void *)lock;
+
+       ACCESS_ONCE(l->locked_pending) = 1;
 
You lost the __constant_le16_to_cpu(_Q_LOCKED_VAL) there. The
unconditional 1 is wrong. You also have to flip the bytes in
locked_pending.
 
I don't think that is wrong. The lock byte is in the least significant 8 
bits and the pending byte is the next higher significant 8 bits 
irrespective of the endian-ness. So a value of 1 in a 16-bit context 
means the lock byte is set, but the pending byte is cleared. The name 
"locked_pending" doesn't mean that locked variable is in a lower address 
than pending. 
-Longman
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
 
 |