mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
To: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com>
Cc: inaky.perez-gonzalez@intel.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	robustmutexes@lists.osdl.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au,
	mingo@elte.hu, jamie@shareable.org
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] FUSYN Realtime & robust mutexes for Linux, v2.3.1
Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2004 00:40:23 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040805004023.65463e88.akpm@osdl.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4111E3B5.1070608@redhat.com>

Ulrich Drepper <drepper@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Andrew Morton wrote:
> 
>  > How large is the slowdown, and on what workloads?
> 
>  The fast path for all locking primitives etc in nptl today is entirely
>  at userlevel.  Normally just a single atomic operation with a dozen
>  other instructions.  With the fusyn stuff each and every locking
>  operation needs a system call to register/unregister the thread as it
>  locks/unlocks mutex/rwlocks/etc.  Go figure how well this works.  We are
>  talking about making the fast path of the locking primitives
>  two/three/four orders of magnitude more expensive.  And this for
>  absolutely no benefit for 99.999% of all the code which uses threads.
> 

ouch, OK.  But doesn't the current futex code continue to work unchanged?

>  > Passing the lock to a non-rt task when there's an rt-task waiting for it
>  > seems pretty poor form, too.
> 
>  No no, that's not what is wanted.  Robust mutexes are a special kind of
>  mutex and not related to rt issues.

I was referring to "scheduling-policy based unlock/wakeup", actually.

  reply	other threads:[~2004-08-05  7:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-08-04  9:13 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2004-08-05  6:21 ` Andrew Morton
2004-08-05  7:06   ` Ulrich Drepper
2004-08-05  7:17     ` Andrew Morton
2004-08-05  7:37       ` Ulrich Drepper
2004-08-05  7:40         ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2004-08-05  8:22           ` Ulrich Drepper
2004-08-05 10:42         ` Ingo Molnar
2004-08-05 11:48         ` Rusty Russell
2004-08-05 13:23           ` Linh Dang
2004-08-05 13:26         ` Linh Dang
2004-08-05 14:02         ` Chris Friesen
2004-08-05 10:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-08-05 10:59   ` Ingo Molnar
2004-08-05  8:39 Eric Valette
2004-08-05 18:16 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2004-08-05 18:16 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2004-08-05 18:16 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2004-08-05 18:22 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2004-08-05 18:37 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2004-08-05 18:39 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky
2004-08-05 18:39 Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20040805004023.65463e88.akpm@osdl.org \
    --to=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=drepper@redhat.com \
    --cc=inaky.perez-gonzalez@intel.com \
    --cc=jamie@shareable.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=robustmutexes@lists.osdl.org \
    --cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome