lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Mar]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: kernel lock contention and scalability

    Manfred Spraul [manfred@colorfullife.com] wrote:
    >
    > > lock contention work would be appreciated. I'm aware of timer scalability
    > > work ongoing at people.redhat.com/mingo/scalable-timers, but is anyone
    > > working on reducing sem_ids contention?
    >
    > Is that really a problem?
    > The contention is high, but the actual lost time is quite small.

    I agree it isn't a major performance problem under that workload. But, I
    thought since the contention was high that other workloads which may
    utilize it more might have shown it to be a significant problem.

    > I've attached 2 changes that might reduce the contention, but it's just
    > an idea, completely untested.

    Thanks for the insight into the sempahore subsystem and the suggested fixes.

    --
    Jonathan Lahr
    IBM Linux Technology Center
    Beaverton, Oregon
    lahr@us.ibm.com
    503-578-3385

    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:29    [W:0.045 / U:0.612 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site