Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 8 Jul 2020 10:41:06 +0200 | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] powerpc: queued spinlocks and rwlocks |
| |
On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 03:57:06PM +1000, Nicholas Piggin wrote: > 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.
> 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
|  |