lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Sep]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH linux-2.6 04/04] brsem: convert cpucontrol to brsem
Nathan Lynch wrote:

>Nick Piggin wrote:
>
>>
>>Note that I happen to also think the idea (brsems) have merit, and
>>that cpucontrol may be one of the places where a sane implementation
>>would actually be useful... but at least when you're introducing
>>this kind of complexity anywhere, you *really* need to be able to
>>back it up with numbers.
>>
>
>The only performance-related complaint with cpu hotplug of which I'm
>aware -- that taking a cpu down on a large system can be painfully
>slow -- resides in the "write side" of the code, which is not the case
>that the brsem implementation optimizes. I think this patch would
>make that case even worse. So I don't think it's appropriate to use a
>brsem for cpu hotplug, especially without trying rwsem first.
>
>

I'm not sure that a brsem would make a noticable difference.

It isn't that cpu hotplug semaphore is a performance problem
now, but that it isn't being used in as many cases as it could
be due to its unscalable nature. For example, a while back I
wanted to use it in the fork() path in the scheduler but
couldn't.

Anyway, as I said, you need to be able to back it up with
numbers ;)

Nick


Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com

-
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: 2005-09-26 03:14    [W:0.056 / U:0.228 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site