lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jan]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH -v5][RFC]: mutex: implement adaptive spinning


On Wed, 7 Jan 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > "Is get_task_struct() really that bad?"
>
> Yes. It's an atomic access (two, in fact, since you need to release it
> too), which is a huge deal if we're talking about a timing-critical
> section of code.

There's another issue: you also need to lock the thing that gives you the
task pointer in the first place. So it's not sufficient to do
get_task_struct(), you also need to do it within a context where you know
that the pointer is not going away _while_ you do it.

And with the mutexes clearing the ->owner field without even holding the
spinlock, that is not a guarantee we can easily get any way. Maybe we'd
need to hold the tasklist_lock or something.

Linus


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-01-08 00:23    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans