[lkml]   [2001]   [Mar]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: spinlock usage - ext2_get_block, lru_list_lock
In article <>,
Anton Blanchard <> wrote:
>It was not surprising the BKL was one of the main offenders. Looking at the
>stats ext2_get_block was the bad guy (UTIL is % of time lock was busy for,
>WAIT is time spent waiting for lock):

Actually, I find the BKL fairly surprising - we've whittled down all the
major non-lowlevel-FS offenders, and I didn't realize that it's still
there in do_exit().

And the do_exit() case should be _trivial_ to fix: almost none of the
code protected by the kernel lock in the exit path actually needs the
lock. I suspect you could cut down the kernel lock there to much

The big case seems to be ext2_get_block(), we'll fix that early in
2.5.x. I think Al already has patches for it.

As to lseek, that one should probably get the inode semaphore, not the
kernel lock.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:29    [W:0.043 / U:1.040 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site