[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCHv1] Prototype ticket locks
>>> On 03.02.15 at 16:01, <david.vrabel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 03/02/15 13:55, Jan Beulich wrote: >>>>> On 03.02.15 at 12:50, <david.vrabel@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Note that spin_lock_irq() and spin_lock_irqsave() now spin with irqs >>> disabled (previously, they would spin with irqs enabled if possible). >>> This is required to prevent deadlocks when the irq handler tries to >>> take the same lock with a higher ticket. >> >> That's another pretty undesirable property (albeit it's not a strict >> implication of using ticket locks - one can make them work with >> interrupts getting properly re-enabled while spinning). > > I've seen too many Linux deadlocks caused be re-enabling irqs while > spinning to consider this a good idea. And I've heard too many complaints on interrupt latency not care. > The ticket stealing stuff that > Suse kernels do doesn't play nice with rw locks or certain hand rolled > synchronization code (in short, if the interrupt spins on something > other than a ticket lock it breaks). The original version indeed had such a problem, but I don't think the current version has anymore. Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |