[lkml]   [2005]   [Nov]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/9] timer locking optimization

On Wed, 30 Nov 2005, Oleg Nesterov wrote:

> Still not correct, I beleive.

Here is a new idea, what do you think about using spin_trylock(), e.g.
something like:

if (spin_trylock(&new_base->t_base.lock)) {
timer->base = &new_base->t_base;
} else
new_base = container_of(base, tvec_base_t, t_base);
It's not like we must start the timer on the current cpu and this might
even be faster. If the new base is busy on another cpu, it's possible we
have to pull dirty cache lines from the other cpu, where we might already
have the data from the current base already in the cache from the detach.

bye, Roman
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: 2005-11-30 16:10    [from the cache]
©2003-2014 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital Ocean