Messages in this thread |  | | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] powerpc/pseries: implement paravirt qspinlocks for SPLPAR | From | Waiman Long <> | Date | Thu, 23 Jul 2020 14:32:36 -0400 |
| |
On 7/23/20 10:00 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Jul 09, 2020 at 12:06:13PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote: >> We don't really need to do a pv_spinlocks_init() if pv_kick() isn't >> supported. > Waiman, if you cannot explain how not having kick is a sane thing, what > are you saying here? > The current PPC paravirt spinlock code doesn't do any cpu kick. It does an equivalence of pv_wait by yielding the cpu to the lock holder only. The pv_spinlocks_init() is for setting up the hash table for doing pv_kick. If we don't need to do pv_kick, we don't need the hash table.
I am not saying that pv_kick is not needed for the PPC environment. I was just trying to adapt the pvqspinlock code to such an environment first. Further investigation on how to implement some kind of pv_kick will be something that we may want to do as a follow on.
BTW, do you have any comment on my v2 lock holder cpu info qspinlock patch? I will have to update the patch to fix the reported 0-day test problem, but I want to collect other feedback before sending out v3.
Cheers, Longman
|  |