search for: 123adcefd40f

...busy loop using the preferred SMT priority pattern. Signed-off-by: Nicholas Piggin <npiggin at gmail.com> --- arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h | 14 ++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+) diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h index 123adcefd40f..9b4671d38674 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/barrier.h @@ -76,6 +76,20 @@ do { \ ___p1; \ }) +#define smp_cond_load_relaxed(ptr, cond_expr) ({ \ + typeof(ptr) __PTR = (ptr); \ + __unqual_scalar_typeof(*ptr) VAL; \ + VAL = REA...

Updated with everybody's feedback (thanks all), and more performance results. What I've found is I might have been measuring the worst load point for the paravirt case, and by looking at a range of loads it's clear that queued spinlocks are overall better even on PV, doubly so when you look at the generally much improved worst case latencies. I have defaulted it to N even though

Hi all, Although [smp_]read_barrier_depends() became part of READ_ONCE() in commit 76ebbe78f739 ("locking/barriers: Add implicit smp_read_barrier_depends() to READ_ONCE()"), it still limps on in the Linux memory model with the sinister hope of attracting innocent new users so that it becomes impossible to remove altogether. Let's strike before it's too late: there's only