Re: SMP scalability: 8 -> 32 CPUs

Malcolm Beattie (mbeattie@sable.ox.ac.uk)
Mon, 30 Nov 1998 10:38:38 +0000 (GMT)

Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
Next message: Andrea Arcangeli: "last_reset == 0 means nothing in scsi code"
Previous message: Frode L. Odegard: "using sockets in kernel threads"
In reply to: Richard Solis: "RE: SMP scalability: 8 -> 32 CPUs"

Larry McVoy writes:
> It's a basic truth that the more scaling you want, the more locks you'll
> need. Very, very quickly this will become an unmanagable problem - the
> kernel becomes a forest of locks - for example, there were thousands
> of locks in the Solaris kernel when I left Sun almost 5 years ago.

As a corroborating data-point, I count about 1400 locks listed
in /usr/sys/kern/lockinfo.c for Digital UNIX 4.0D.

--Malcolm

-- Malcolm Beattie <mbeattie@sable.ox.ac.uk> Unix Systems Programmer Oxford University Computing Services

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

Next message: Andrea Arcangeli: "last_reset == 0 means nothing in scsi code"
Previous message: Frode L. Odegard: "using sockets in kernel threads"
In reply to: Richard Solis: "RE: SMP scalability: 8 -> 32 CPUs"