WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-devel

Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 00/10] [PATCH RFC V2] Paravirtualized ticketlocks

To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH 00/10] [PATCH RFC V2] Paravirtualized ticketlocks
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 12:06:36 -0700
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxxxx>, KVM <kvm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@xxxxxxxxxx>, Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Marcelo Tosatti <mtosatti@xxxxxxxxxx>, Andi Kleen <andi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx>, Jan Beulich <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx>, "xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Stephan Diestelhorst <stephan.diestelhorst@xxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 12:07:57 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <CA+55aFwm7ESNfrHhEHrAKcjcPUq8YxtuEkJd5PzAekYo2dMYNw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
References: <cover.1315878463.git.jeremy.fitzhardinge@xxxxxxxxxx> <4E835851.7070502@xxxxxxxxx> <4E835E50.2020307@xxxxxxxx> <201109282008.17722.stephan.diestelhorst@xxxxxxx> <CA+55aFwm7ESNfrHhEHrAKcjcPUq8YxtuEkJd5PzAekYo2dMYNw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:6.0.2) Gecko/20110906 Thunderbird/6.0.2
On 09/28/2011 11:49 AM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> But I don't care all *that* deeply. I do agree that the xaddw trick is
> pretty tricky. I just happen to think that it's actually *less* tricky
> than "read the upper bits separately and depend on subtle ordering
> issues with another writer that happens at the same time on another
> CPU".
>
> So I can live with either form - as long as it works. I think it might
> be easier to argue that the xaddw is guaranteed to work, because all
> values at all points are unarguably atomic (yeah, we read the lower
> bits nonatomically, but as the owner of the lock we know that nobody
> else can write them).

Exactly.  I just did a locked add variant, and while the code looks a
little simpler, it definitely has more actual complexity to analyze.

    J

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel