Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Tue, 25 Sep 2001 23:57:18 -0700 (PDT) | Subject | Re: Locking comment on shrink_caches() | From | "David S. Miller" <> |
| |
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@zip.com.au> Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 22:31:32 -0700
Here are kumon's test results from March, with and without the hashed lock patch:
Please elaborate on what the webbench-3.0 static gets was really doing.
Was this test composed of multiple accesses to the same or a small set of files? If so, that is indeed the case where the page cache locking patches won't help at all.
The more diversified the set of files being accessed, the greater the gain from the locking changes. You have to encourage the cpus at least have a chance at accessing different hash chains :-)
Franks a lot, David S. Miller davem@redhat.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/
|  |