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:0.313 / U:0.224 seconds]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site