Re: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4

> hm.  16 CPUs hitting the same semaphore at great arrival rates.  The cost
> of a short spin is much less than the cost of a sleep/wakeup.  The machine
> was doing 100,000 - 200,000 context switches per second.

interesting.. this might be a good indication that a "spin a bit first"
mutex slowpath for some locks might be worth implementing...


-
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/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4
    • From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4
    • From: Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4
    • From: Roman Zippel <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4
    • From: Andrew Morton <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4
• Next by Date: Re: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4
• Previous by thread: Re: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4
• Next by thread: Re: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]