* Christoph Hellwig <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 12:51:21PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > This barrier thing is constructed so that it will not write in the
> > sync() condition (the hot path) when there are no active lock
> > sections; thus avoiding cacheline bouncing. -- I'm just not sure how
> > this will work out in relation to PI. We might track those in the
> > barrier scope and boost those by the max prio of the blockers.
>
> Is this really needed? We seem to grow new funky locking algorithms
> exponentially, while people already have a hard time understanding the
> existing ones.
yes, it's needed.
Ingo
-
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]
