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;
Date:   Tue, 18 Dec 2018 14:14:19 +0100
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Cc:     Yongji Xie <elohimes@gmail.com>, mingo@redhat.com,
        will.deacon@arm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Xie Yongji <xieyongji@baidu.com>, zhangyu31@baidu.com,
        liuqi16@baidu.com, yuanlinsi01@baidu.com, nixun@baidu.com,
        lilin24@baidu.com, longman@redhat.com,
        andrea.parri@amarulasolutions.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] locking/rwsem: Avoid issuing wakeup before setting the
 reader waiter to nil
Message-ID: <20181218131419.GD16284@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20181129172700.GA11632@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20181129180828.GA11650@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <729ceddb-dd9a-ec2a-f74e-03fa4d7e65e8@redhat.com>
 <20181129213017.v3eljor54lfpoug2@linux-r8p5>
 <20181129213421.wwvhsjql3m3lvtv4@linux-r8p5>
 <20181129221714.GF11632@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <CAONzpcZ_kQ0cwit+d5uL=v2SqwP=Fo0WSihdCr23uKCAFAhTbQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20181217113718.GB4900@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20181217205310.pvwcryyaqlrzmaex@linux-r8p5>
 <20181218131031.GJ15430@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20181218131031.GJ15430@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 02:10:31PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 12:53:10PM -0800, Davidlohr Bueso wrote:

> > So how about the following to reduce some of the performance penalty (at
> > the cost of more complexity)?
> 
> I'd rather do it like so, except I'm still conflicted on the naming.

> +void wake_q_add(struct wake_q_head *head, struct task_struct *task)
> +{
> +	if (__wake_q_add(head, task))
> +		get_task_struct(task);
> +}
> +
> +void wake_q_add_safe(struct wake_q_head *head, struct task_struct *task)
> +{
> +	if (!__wake_a_add(head, task))
> +		put_task_struct(task);
>  }

That is, in the one case it has internal reference counting, in the
other case it consumes the reference counting.