Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation

Am Dienstag, 13. Dezember 2005 14:09 schrieb Alan Cox:
> On Maw, 2005-12-13 at 13:47 +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > > spinlock to do the cmpxchg. This means that there wont be one single 
> > > global spinlock to emulate cmpxchg, but the mutex's own spinlock can be 
> > > used for it.
> > 
> > Can't you use the pointer as a hash input?
> 
> Some platforms already do this for certain sets of operations like
> atomic_t. The downside however is that you no longer control the lock
> contention or cache line bouncing. It becomes a question of luck rather
> than science as to how well it scales.

On the other hand you don't control cache eviction either, do you?

	Regards
		Oliver
-
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/

---

• References:
  • Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
    • From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
    • From: Oliver Neukum <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
    • From: Alan Cox <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: [Patch] Fix calculation of grow_pgdat_span() in mm/memory_hotplug.c
• Next by Date: Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
• Next by thread: Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation
• 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]