[lkml]   [2005]   [Dec]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4
At 03:11 AM 12/26/2005 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
>Arjan van de Ven <> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > hm. 16 CPUs hitting the same semaphore at great arrival rates. The cost
> > > of a short spin is much less than the cost of a sleep/wakeup. The
> machine
> > > was doing 100,000 - 200,000 context switches per second.
> >
> > interesting.. this might be a good indication that a "spin a bit first"
> > mutex slowpath for some locks might be worth implementing...
>If we see a workload which is triggering such high context switch rates,
>maybe. But I don't think we've seen any such for a long time.

Hmm. Is there a real workload where such a high context switch rate is
necessary? Every time I've seen a high (100,000 - 200,000 is beyond absurd
on my little box, but...) context switch rate, it's been because something


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: 2005-12-26 18:27    [W:0.146 / U:2.324 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site