From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753416AbbIPPIe (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 16 Sep 2015 11:08:34 -0400
Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:53531 "EHLO
	casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753325AbbIPPIc (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 16 Sep 2015 11:08:32 -0400
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 17:03:07 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Waiman Long <waiman.long@hpe.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>, x86@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Scott J Norton <scott.norton@hp.com>,
        Douglas Hatch <doug.hatch@hp.com>, Davidlohr Bueso <dave@stgolabs.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 6/6] locking/pvqspinlock: Queue node adaptive spinning
Message-ID: <20150916150307.GD3604@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1441996658-62854-1-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hpe.com>
 <1441996658-62854-7-git-send-email-Waiman.Long@hpe.com>
 <20150914141012.GV18489@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <55F721FC.4000504@hpe.com>
 <20150915083804.GY16853@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <55F839FE.9030403@hpe.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <55F839FE.9030403@hpe.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Sep 15, 2015 at 11:32:14AM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 09/15/2015 04:38 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 03:37:32PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> >>BTW, the queue head vCPU at pv_wait_head_and_lock() doesn't wait early, it
> >>will spin the full threshold as there is no way for it to figure out if the
> >>lock holder is running or not.
> >We can know its cpu id, right? Surely we should then be able to figure
> >out if its active or not, I'm thinking the KVM/Xen know these things
> >somewhere.
> 
> We can make a guess of the lock holder cpu id by peeking at previous MCS
> node. However, if the current lock holder got the lock without entering the
> queue or it got the lock by stealing, we won't have information of what CPU
> it is.

Ah, yes I see, we do not have storage for the lock holder. Yes you're
right.