Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 08 Jul 2002 07:53:41 -0700 | From | Dave Hansen <> | Subject | Re: BKL removal |
| |
Matthew Wilcox wrote: > On Sun, Jul 07, 2002 at 11:06:32PM -0400, Alexander Viro wrote: > >>The thing being, if you are already contended you are playing "I'll release >>CPU now" vs. "I'll spin in hope that contender will go away right now". >> >>IOW, it's a win only if you get contention often and for short intervals. >>Which is a very good indication that something is rotten with your locking >>scheme. Like, say it, having lost the control over the amount of locks >>as the result of brainde^Woverenthusiastic belief that fine-grained == >>good. With everything that follows from that... > > So let's get some numbers. It really shouldn't be hard to make our > current semaphores spin a little before they sleep. If we get some > numbers showing it does help then either we need this change in mainline > or we need to fix our locking.
Sounds good to me. Do you have any code, or a workload that you know will trigger it? I have a feeling that Specweb will probably show this behavior, but I want something simpler.
-- Dave Hansen haveblue@us.ibm.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/
| |