Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 21 Mar 2013 23:38:52 -0400 | From | Rik van Riel <> | Subject | Re: ipc,sem: sysv semaphore scalability |
| |
On 03/21/2013 06:01 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Thu, 21 Mar 2013 17:50:05 -0400 Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com> wrote: > >> On Thu, 2013-03-21 at 14:10 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: >>> On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 15:55:30 -0400 Rik van Riel <riel@surriel.com> wrote: >>> >>>> This series makes the sysv semaphore code more scalable, >>>> by reducing the time the semaphore lock is held, and making >>>> the locking more scalable for semaphore arrays with multiple >>>> semaphores. >>>> >>>> The first four patches were written by Davidlohr Buesso, and >>>> reduce the hold time of the semaphore lock. >>>> >>>> The last three patches change the sysv semaphore code locking >>>> to be more fine grained, providing a performance boost when >>>> multiple semaphores in a semaphore array are being manipulated >>>> simultaneously. >>> >>> These patches conflict pretty badly with Peter's: >> >> On one point I'm a little confused: my series has been in linux-next for >> a while. On what tree is this series based? > > It'll be based on mainline. People often forget to peek into > linux-next when preparing patches. In the great majority of cases > that's OK. Occasionally, we lose...
I'll be happy to rebase the series onto linux-next, to make merging easier for you.
-- All rights reversed.
| |