[lkml]   [2002]   [Feb]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Radix-tree pagecache for 2.5
>>>>> "Ingo" == Ingo Molnar <> writes:

Ingo> On 1 Feb 2002, Momchil Velikov wrote:
>> So, we can use a read-write spinlock instead ->i_shared_lock, ok ?

Ingo> using read-write locks does not solve the scalability problem: the problem
Ingo> is the bouncing of the spinlock cacheline from CPU to CPU.

Does cache line bounce (shared somewhere -> exclusive elsewhere) cost
more that a simple miss (present nowhere -> exclusive somewhere) ?


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 13:16    [W:0.098 / U:18.020 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site