From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262007AbVCNIel (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Mar 2005 03:34:41 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261362AbVCNIek (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Mar 2005 03:34:40 -0500 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:65175 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261339AbVCNIei (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Mar 2005 03:34:38 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH] break_lock forever broken From: Arjan van de Ven To: Nick Piggin Cc: Ingo Molnar , Hugh Dickins , Andrew Morton , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <42354A3F.4030904@yahoo.com.au> References: <20050311203427.052f2b1b.akpm@osdl.org> <20050314070230.GA24860@elte.hu> <42354562.1080900@yahoo.com.au> <20050314081402.GA26589@elte.hu> <42354A3F.4030904@yahoo.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 09:34:30 +0100 Message-Id: <1110789270.6288.53.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.2 (2.0.2-3) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 4.1 (++++) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 2.63 on pentafluge.infradead.org summary: Content analysis details: (4.1 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.3 RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO Received: contains a numeric HELO 1.1 RCVD_IN_DSBL RBL: Received via a relay in list.dsbl.org [] 2.5 RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK RBL: Sent directly from dynamic IP address [80.57.133.107 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] 0.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS RBL: SORBS: sender is listed in SORBS [80.57.133.107 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > Yes that's the tradeoff. I just feel that the former may be better, > especially because the latter can be timing dependant (so you may get > things randomly "happening"), and the former is apparently very low > overhead compared with the cost of taking the lock. Any numbers, > anyone? as I said, since the cacheline just got dirtied, the write is just half a cycle which is so much in the noise that it really doesn't matter.