From: Olivier Dion <odion@efficios.com>
To: libc-help@sourceware.org, libc-alpha@sourceware.org
Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>,
Adhemerval Zanella Netto <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>,
"carlos@redhat.com" <carlos@redhat.com>,
Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de>
Subject: Re: Dead code in pthread_cond_wait() for spin-wait
Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2023 11:45:51 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87ttqvvo7k.fsf@laura> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <d38585f6-d896-47bc-8716-1a0a671f7f45@linaro.org>
On Wed, 11 Oct 2023, Adhemerval Zanella Netto <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> wrote:
> On 11/10/23 15:30, Olivier Dion via Libc-help wrote:
[...]
>> However, looking at the following snippet in nptl/pthread_cond_wait.c:
>>
>> static __always_inline int
>> __pthread_cond_wait_common (pthread_cond_t *cond, pthread_mutex_t *mutex,
>> clockid_t clockid, const struct __timespec64 *abstime)
>> {
>> const int maxspin = 0;
>> [...]
>> /* Spin-wait first. [...] */
>> unsigned int spin = maxspin;
>> while (signals == 0 && spin > 0) {
>> [...]
>> }
>> [...]
>> }
>>
>
> Afaik it was added a placeholder for future extension, so fell free to
> send a patch to delete it.
[...]
What about making it work instead? Would this be something to consider?
IMHO it would be worth it. Having a fast-path that spins instead of
taking the futex directly can greatly impact performance in some cases.
In the meantime, I think it is safe to remove it. I'll send a patch on
libc-alpha for that.
Thanks,
Olivier
--
Olivier Dion
EfficiOS Inc.
https://www.efficios.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-12 15:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-11 18:30 Olivier Dion
2023-10-11 18:36 ` Mathieu Desnoyers
2023-10-11 18:57 ` Adhemerval Zanella Netto
2023-10-12 15:45 ` Olivier Dion [this message]
2023-10-12 16:40 ` Florian Weimer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87ttqvvo7k.fsf@laura \
--to=odion@efficios.com \
--cc=adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org \
--cc=carlos@redhat.com \
--cc=fw@deneb.enyo.de \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.org \
--cc=libc-help@sourceware.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).