![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Sat, Jun 21 2003, Lou Langholtz wrote: > > b) you definitely don't have to use separate queue locks. The > >thing will work fine with spinlock being shared and I doubt that there > >will be any noticable extra contention. > > > Probably not noticeable no. The approach you took is probably _worse_ than a single lock, since you don't even cache align the locks. I'd say just keep the single nbd_lock and use that in all queues, seperate locks are a questionable win but do take up extra space. -- Jens Axboe - 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 13:36 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||