Re: [PATCH] use unfair spinlock when running on hypervisor.

[Andi Kleen]

On Thu, Jun 03, 2010 at 12:06:39PM +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-06-01 at 21:36 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > Collecting the contention/usage statistics on a per spinlock
> > > basis seems complex.  I believe a practical approximation
> > > to this are adaptive mutexes where upon hitting a spin
> > > time threshold, punt and let the scheduler reconcile fairness.
> > 
> > That would probably work, except: how do you get the
> > adaptive spinlock into a paravirt op without slowing
> > down a standard kernel?
> 
> It only ever comes into play in the case where the spinlock is contended
> anyway -- surely it shouldn't be _that_ much of a performance issue?

The problem is fitting the state into the u32

Also "lightly contended" is not that uncommon.

-Andi
-- 
ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Speaking for myself only.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/