Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] powerpc: queued spinlocks and rwlocks
From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Date: 2020-07-08 23:54:42
Also in:
linux-arch, lkml, virtualization
From: Waiman Long <longman@redhat.com>
Date: 2020-07-08 23:54:42
Also in:
linux-arch, lkml, virtualization
On 7/8/20 4:41 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 03:57:06PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote:quoted
Yes, powerpc could certainly get more performance out of the slow paths, and then there are a few parameters to tune.Can you clarify? The slow path is already in use on ARM64 which is weak, so I doubt there's superfluous serialization present. And Will spend a fair amount of time on making that thing guarantee forward progressm, so there just isn't too much room to play.quoted
We don't have a good alternate patching for function calls yet, but that would be something to do for native vs pv.Going by your jump_label implementation, support for static_call should be fairly straight forward too, no? https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200624153024.794671356@infradead.org
Speaking of static_call, I am also looking forward to it. Do you have an idea when that will be merged? Cheers, Longman