Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CAHk-=wh1XeaxWXG5QziGA4ds918UnW1hO924kusgVB-wGj+9Og@mail.gmail.com>
 <871qwgmqws.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au>
In-Reply-To: <871qwgmqws.fsf@mpe.ellerman.id.au>
From:   Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Date:   Thu, 26 May 2022 09:52:04 -0700
Message-ID: <CAHk-=wjd-RVttYwPc9RYD+x0b=WNYc_PZ2JKwPxc8fm54t0d2w@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] locking/lockref: Use try_cmpxchg64 in CMPXCHG_LOOP macro
To:     Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
Cc:     Uros Bizjak <ubizjak@gmail.com>,
        Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@arm.com>,
        Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>,
        Russell King <linux@armlinux.org.uk>,
        Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@alpha.franken.de>,
        Heiko Carstens <hca@linux.ibm.com>,
        "the arch/x86 maintainers" <x86@kernel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, Waiman.Long@hp.com,
        Paul McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        linuxppc-dev <linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 5:15 AM Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au> wrote:
>
> Do you know of a benchmark that shows it up? I tried a few things but
> couldn't get lockref_get() to count for more than 1-2%.

Heh. 1% for a small instruction sequence that is only handful of
instructions and is used in just a couple of places counts as "very
hot" for me.

I assume you did the natural thing: threaded pathname lookup (with
paths being of the longer variety to not be dominated by system call
etc costs).

               Linus