[lkml]   [2007]   [Jan]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/7] barrier: a scalable synchonisation barrier
    On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 04:24:35PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
    > > > This barrier thing is constructed so that it will not write in the
    > > > sync() condition (the hot path) when there are no active lock
    > > > sections; thus avoiding cacheline bouncing. -- I'm just not sure how
    > > > this will work out in relation to PI. We might track those in the
    > > > barrier scope and boost those by the max prio of the blockers.
    > >
    > > Is this really needed? We seem to grow new funky locking algorithms
    > > exponentially, while people already have a hard time understanding the
    > > existing ones.
    > yes, it's needed.

    Thanks for the wonderful and indepth explanation </sarcasm>
    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: 2007-01-28 16:37    [W:0.019 / U:77.760 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site