From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jan  9 06:17:32 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9AC06423;
 Thu,  9 Jan 2014 06:17:32 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from citadel.icyb.net.ua (citadel.icyb.net.ua [212.40.38.140])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1ADB1016;
 Thu,  9 Jan 2014 06:17:31 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from porto.starpoint.kiev.ua (porto-e.starpoint.kiev.ua
 [212.40.38.100])
 by citadel.icyb.net.ua (8.8.8p3/ICyb-2.3exp) with ESMTP id IAA08706;
 Thu, 09 Jan 2014 08:17:29 +0200 (EET) (envelope-from avg@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1])
 by porto.starpoint.kiev.ua with esmtp (Exim 4.34 (FreeBSD))
 id 1W18vo-000Dsq-PN; Thu, 09 Jan 2014 08:17:28 +0200
Message-ID: <52CE3EC0.9060808@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 08:16:32 +0200
From: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64;
 rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Acquiring a lock on the same CPU that holds it - what can be done?
References: <CAJ-Vmok-AJkz0THu72ThTdRhO2h1CnHwffq=cFZGZkbC=cWJZA@mail.gmail.com>
 <52CD7D07.2010608@FreeBSD.org> <20140108185912.GU59496@kib.kiev.ua>
 <52CDC376.5040302@FreeBSD.org> <20140109053113.GW59496@kib.kiev.ua>
In-Reply-To: <20140109053113.GW59496@kib.kiev.ua>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian@FreeBSD.org>,
 "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-arch>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2014 06:17:32 -0000

on 09/01/2014 07:31 Konstantin Belousov said the following:
> I.e. you propose to extend the prioriry propagation to all cases of lock
> acquisition.  This is not quite correct as well, but now in the other
> direction, since it prevents non-contending high-priority thread from
> running.

Yes.

> I think a good experiment would be to add critical_enter/critical_exit
> to non-sleepable locks and see.

Yes.

-- 
Andriy Gapon