lkml.org 
[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
    From
    Date
    >>>>> "Ingo" == Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> 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) ?

    Regards,
    -velco

    -
    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 13:16    [W:0.024 / U:22.004 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site