lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [May]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: fs/locks.c BKL removal
On Fri, May 10, 2002 at 04:17:29PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> It was I who put the BKL back into locks.c, much to
> Matthew's disgust...

The disgust was targetted more at removing the abstraction of
locking scheme which I'd put in and having explicit lock_kernel() /
unlock_kernel() calls. I'd used (iirc) acquire_lock() / release_lock()
macros which could have just been redefined.

> The problem was that replacing the BKL with a semaphore
> seriously damaged Apache thoughput on 8-way. Apache
> was using flock()-based synchronisation and replacing
> a spin with a schedule just killed it.

Which says that our semaphores suck, because they don't try to spin for a
bit before scheduling. Of course, your change back was the right thing
to do in the 2.3.late timeframe.

--
Revolutions do not require corporate support.
-
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 13:26    [W:0.050 / U:0.236 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site