lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jan]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch 1/6] mmu_notifier: Core code
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 11:19:28AM -0800, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 30 Jan 2008, Jack Steiner wrote:
>
> > Moving to a different lock solves the problem.
>
> Well it gets us back to the issue why we removed the lock. As Robin said
> before: If its global then we can have a huge number of tasks contending
> for the lock on startup of a process with a large number of ranks. The
> reason to go to mmap_sem was that it was placed in the mm_struct and so we
> would just have a couple of contentions per mm_struct.
>
> I'll be looking for some other way to do this.

I think Andrea's original concept of the lock in the mmu_notifier_head
structure was the best. I agree with him that it should be a spinlock
instead of the rw_lock.

Thanks,
Robin


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-01-30 23:23    [W:0.074 / U:0.772 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site