Re: [RFC] New locking primitive for 2.5

From: Linus Torvalds (torvalds@transmeta.com)
Date: Fri Feb 08 2002 - 14:11:50 EST


On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> Yesterday, Ingo said:
>
> > i think one example *could* be to turn inode->i_sem into a combi-lock. Eg.
> > generic_file_llseek() could use the spin variant.
> >
> > this is a real performance problem, i've seen scheduling storms in
> > dbench-type runs due to llseek taking the inode semaphore.

... so just make it a spinlock instead.

The semaphore is overkill, as the only thing we're really protecting is
one 64-bit access against other updates.

                Linus

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Feb 15 2002 - 21:00:21 EST