Re: [PATCH] break_lock forever broken

From: Arjan van de Ven
Date: Mon Mar 14 2005 - 03:36:01 EST



>
> Yes that's the tradeoff. I just feel that the former may be better,
> especially because the latter can be timing dependant (so you may get
> things randomly "happening"), and the former is apparently very low
> overhead compared with the cost of taking the lock. Any numbers,
> anyone?

as I said, since the cacheline just got dirtied, the write is just half
a cycle which is so much in the noise that it really doesn't matter.


-
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/