[lkml]   [2006]   [Aug]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Why Semaphore Hardware-Dependent?
    On Tuesday 29 August 2006 20:30, David Howells wrote:
    > Andi Kleen <> wrote:
    > > BTW maybe it would be a good idea to switch the wait list to a hlist,
    > > then the last user in the queue wouldn't need to
    > > touch the cache line of the head. Or maybe even a single linked
    > > list then some more cache bounces might be avoidable.
    > You need a list_head to get O(1) push at one end and O(1) pop at the other.

    The poper should know its node address already because it's on its own stack.

    > In addition a singly-linked list makes interruptible ops non-O(1) also.

    When they are interrupted I guess? Hardly a problem to make that slower.


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2006-08-29 20:35    [W:0.022 / U:23.948 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site