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/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: [email protected] (Eric W. Biederman)
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- References:
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Linus Torvalds <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: Daniel Jacobowitz <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- From: "H. Peter Anvin" <[email protected]>
- Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- Prev by Date: Re: [RFC] [PATCH 0/3] ioat: DMA engine support
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH]: Free pages from local pcp lists under tight memory conditions
- Previous by thread: Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- Next by thread: Re: [patch] SMP alternatives
- Index(es):
 |