Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753409Ab2E3Gtx (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 May 2012 02:49:53 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:33789 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751784Ab2E3Gtw (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 May 2012 02:49:52 -0400 Message-ID: <4FC5C34C.9010005@redhat.com> Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 14:50:52 +0800 From: Asias He User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:12.0) Gecko/20120430 Thunderbird/12.0.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tejun Heo CC: Tim Gardner , Jens Axboe , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, tim.gardner@canonical.com Subject: Re: [PATCH V3] block: Mitigate lock unbalance caused by lock switching References: <20120528102214.GB15202@dhcp-172-17-108-109.mtv.corp.google.com> <1338255542-22247-1-git-send-email-asias@redhat.com> <4FC4D2F2.2070309@gmail.com> <4FC5BDF5.2040000@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 889 Lines: 28 On 05/30/2012 02:28 PM, Tejun Heo wrote: > Hello, > > On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 3:28 PM, Asias He wrote: >>> Isn't the 'if' clause superfluous ? You could just do the assignment, >>> e.g., >>> >>> + spin_lock_irq(lock); >>> + q->queue_lock =&q->__queue_lock; >>> + spin_unlock_irq(lock); >> >> >> Well, this saves a if clause but adds an unnecessary assignment if the lock >> is already internal lock. > > It's not hot path. Dirtying the cacheline there doesn't mean anything. > I don't really care either way but making optimization argument is > pretty silly here. I don't care this neither ;-) -- Asias -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/