Re: [patch] remove the BKL (Big Kernel Lock), this time for real

[Ingo Molnar]

* Bill Huey <bhuey@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Judging from how the Linux code is done and the numbers I get from
> Bill Irwin in casual conversation, the Linux SMP approach is clearly
> the right track at this time with it's hand honed per-CPU awareness of
> things. The only serious problem that spinlocks have as they aren't
> preemptable, which is what Ingo is trying to fix.

a clarification: note that the current BKL is a special case. No way do
i suggest that the BKS is the proper model for any SMP implementation.
It is a narrow special-case because it wraps historic UP-only kernel
code.

our primary multiprocessing primitives are still the following 4:
lockless data structures, RCU, spinlocks and mutexes. (reverse ordered
by level of parallelism.) The BKS is basically a fifth method, a special
type of semaphore that i'd never want to be seen used by any new SMP
code. It is completely local to sched.c.

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