![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 21:49:52 -0700, Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> wrote: >Keith Owens <kaos@sgi.com> wrote: >> >> Enable interrupts while waiting for a disabled spinlock, but only if >> interrupts were enabled before issuing spin_lock_irqsave(). It makes a >> measurable difference to interrupt servicing on large systems. > >Do you know which are the offending locks? Workload dependent. We already service interrupts while waiting for a non-disabled spinlock. The patch allows a cpu to do some useful work and service interrupts while waiting for disabled spinlocks as well. >How much difference, and how large are the systems? From memory (September 2003) 3-5% improvement on an AIM7 run, with 64 processors. - 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 13:02 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||