Received: by 2002:ad5:474a:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id i10csp2796451imu; Thu, 29 Nov 2018 10:19:56 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/UPHjnksh/Sa1gHB0xqHV6vu6SMlc+ANwF8XVaUjJmGgDf1EC6UUd1QEKCbCcTWNl3TU/o1 X-Received: by 2002:a65:4b82:: with SMTP id t2mr935767pgq.189.1543515596328; Thu, 29 Nov 2018 10:19:56 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1543515596; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=PwNCwCSlstU8dZ0YlLK8w2jAFjQcrZD7hTlCUQ6T7TPZ4WxdCYMKMmworpFTc2MNYV YJ8jESHe5gO0aLc8JcvzQ/C6hnud8u1789xxPiYLBrs6O/wQ2EK+2Nmg1w9Fc0ze7aBd zwtjOkxrzbxU9Iti6ds/99+Zl1CqiKvW6nzzT0bIym20WT4tTWzBjVfx9xnYAitgvK4j +SICkoc4A4MKUL1FS/ZUBKm2SMSG9xz757uydyW8Co/T+PW3y4MxGe8pBtf+B4xDW1/0 8PGHHEgqqhYykX1BIx6rmWm4ccXITFXitkg7qKLucMjomBPuuK8VwM6FgCZYIUj5NaiH CaxA== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id:subject:cc :to:from:date; bh=TI2xvDQXLMS1k4NMJjVEZZyGRknvIAq0gAAE9lSeeW0=; b=aWi+9niB/biz2gsB2m4BLRCuoJw3YzlSby5afNimGhLxmyK3M/UIeNENuQWYlaBXhy g4XnGIpprq8ORLLhS4UvavgX3oexNNoMHMUfQMoXfob7pZjKUeBaOsQvtGvXM4bGtqBq V/0zc+1zbI9W/ERpk6wAhpa5BwaII8L9PsIlcDlq8+AtzN1ttfdgXlncgiW8VuTT+TSL w+5TTiJVhxs8oE6vvK/eBXGBaU6iFviUU90VxLaJLRM5CaoaZgN+gSbexHxe72QviW49 G//ujOX6ayYeynGP+3SNP1528J7jh2L5NQYx9O2zP66QuekSOxCGIadXkMWT4Val4LHv m4pw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id n28si2888486pfb.88.2018.11.29.10.19.40; Thu, 29 Nov 2018 10:19:56 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728161AbeK3FXl (ORCPT + 99 others); Fri, 30 Nov 2018 00:23:41 -0500 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:53556 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726676AbeK3FXl (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Nov 2018 00:23:41 -0500 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87D22AF9A; Thu, 29 Nov 2018 18:17:24 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2018 10:17:16 -0800 From: Davidlohr Bueso To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Waiman Long , Yongji Xie , mingo@redhat.com, will.deacon@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, xieyongji@baidu.com, zhangyu31@baidu.com, liuqi16@baidu.com, yuanlinsi01@baidu.com, nixun@baidu.com, lilin24@baidu.com Subject: Re: [RFC] locking/rwsem: Avoid issuing wakeup before setting the reader waiter to nil Message-ID: <20181129181715.dqqv6apsv4p47rry@linux-r8p5> References: <1543495830-2644-1-git-send-email-xieyongji@baidu.com> <20181129131232.GN2131@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <5598cd71-c3c8-d6ef-eb30-777cf901a2ef@redhat.com> <20181129160627.GU2131@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <8cc45695-b325-a219-8b46-d5da6ddfdd63@redhat.com> <20181129172700.GA11632@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20181129181312.GC11632@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20181129181312.GC11632@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20180323 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 29 Nov 2018, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >On Thu, Nov 29, 2018 at 12:58:26PM -0500, Waiman Long wrote: >> OK, you convinced me. However, that can still lead to anonymous wakeups >> that can be problematic if it happens in certain places. Should we try >> to reduce anonymous wakeup as much as possible? > >No, we should at all times accept and expect spurious wakeups. Right, when this was merged, spurious wakeups were acknowledged as quite possible.