Re: [PATCH] lockref: remove cpu_relax() again

[Heiko Carstens]

On Thu, Sep 05, 2013 at 03:18:14PM +0200, Heiko Carstens wrote:
> d472d9d9 "lockref: Relax in cmpxchg loop" added a cpu_relax() call to the
> CMPXCHG_LOOP() macro. However to me it seems to be wrong since it is very
> likely that the next round will succeed (or the loop will be left).
> Even worse: cpu_relax() is very expensive on s390, since it means yield
> "my virtual cpu to the hypervisor". So we are talking of several 1000 cycles.
> 
> In fact some measurements show the bad impact of the cpu_relax() call on
> s390 using Linus' test case that "stats()" like mad:
> 
> Without converting s390 to lockref:
> Total loops: 81236173
> 
> After converting s390 to lockref:
> Total loops: 31896802
> 
> After converting s390 to lockref but with removed cpu_relax() call:
> Total loops: 86242190

All of those should have been "converting s390 to ARCH_USE_CMPXCHG_LOCKREF"
instead of "to lockref" of course .. ;)

--
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/