lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Feb]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] New locking primitive for 2.5

On Thu, 7 Feb 2002, yodaiken wrote:

> So what's the difference between combi_spin and combi_mutex?
> combi_spin becomes
> if not mutex locked, spin
> else sleep
> Bizzare

no, the real optimization is that when spin meets spin, they will not
mutex. If a mutex-user has it then spins turn into mutex, but that (is
supposed to) happen rarely.

i think one example *could* be to turn inode->i_sem into a combi-lock. Eg.
generic_file_llseek() could use the spin variant.

this is a real performance problem, i've seen scheduling storms in
dbench-type runs due to llseek taking the inode semaphore.

whether combi-locks truly bring performance benefits remains to be seen,
but the patch definitely needs to provide some working example and some
hard numbers for some real workload.

Ingo

-
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 13:24    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans