mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
Cc: Ulrich Drepper <drepper@gmail.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jakub@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] 2.6.16 - futex: small optimization (?)
Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 17:26:43 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060329152643.GA13194@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4429BCAC.80208@tmr.com>


* Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com> wrote:

> Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> >On 3/27/06, Pierre PEIFFER <pierre.peiffer@bull.net> wrote:
> >>I found a (optimization ?) problem in the futexes, during a futex_wake,
> >>  if the waiter has a higher priority than the waker.
> >
> >There are no such situations anymore in an optimal userlevel
> >implementation.  The last problem (in pthread_cond_signal) was fixed
> >by the addition of FUTEX_WAKE_OP.  The userlevel code you're looking
> >at is simply not optimized for the modern kernels.
> 
> What are you suggesting here, that the kernel can be inefficient as 
> long as the user has a way to program around it?

What are you suggesting here, that FUTEX_WAKE_UP is a "user way to 
program around" an inefficiency? If yes then please explain to me why 
and what you would do differently.

	Ingo

  reply	other threads:[~2006-03-29 15:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-03-28  7:37 Pierre PEIFFER
2006-03-28 10:05 ` Eric Dumazet
2006-03-28 15:02 ` Ulrich Drepper
2006-03-28 22:46   ` Bill Davidsen
2006-03-29 15:26     ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2006-03-30 20:27       ` Bill Davidsen
2006-03-31  6:01         ` Ingo Molnar
2006-03-31 14:50           ` Bill Davidsen
2006-03-31 18:15             ` Ingo Molnar
2006-03-29 13:18   ` Pierre PEIFFER
2006-03-29 15:26     ` Eric Dumazet
2006-03-30 14:51       ` Pierre PEIFFER

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=20060329152643.GA13194@elte.hu \
    --to=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=davidsen@tmr.com \
    --cc=drepper@gmail.com \
    --cc=jakub@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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

all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®