[lkml]   [2002]   [Feb]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
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.


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: 2005-03-22 13:24    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean