Re: [patch] SMP alternatives

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On Wed, 23 Nov 2005, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> 
> Yes.  Any shared mmaps may require working lock.

Not "any". Only writable shared mmap. Which is actually the rare case.

Even then, we might want to have such processes have a way to say "I don't 
do futexes in this mmap" or similar. Quite often, writable shared mmaps 
aren't interested in locked cycles - they are there to just write things 
to disk, and all the serialization is done in the kernel when the user 
does a "munmap()" or a "msync()".

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

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux