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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org
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 <torvalds@osdl.org>
- Re: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4
  - From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>

References:
- [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4
  - From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
- Re: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4
  - From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
- Re: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4
  - From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
- Re: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4
  - From: Roman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>
- Re: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4
  - From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
- Re: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4
  - From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
- Re: [patch 0/9] mutex subsystem, -V4
  - From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>

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]