From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
To: Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@suse.cz>
Cc: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@goop.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Subject: Re: Spinlocks: Factor our GENERIC_LOCKBREAK in order to avoid spin with irqs disable
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2008 10:02:05 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0806261001310.7369@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1214471867.17319.8.camel@elijah.suse.cz>
On Thu, 26 Jun 2008, Petr Tesarik wrote:
> We should probably re-think the whole locking scheme, because spinlocks
> were designed to be held for a short period of time. This was a fair
> assumption when they were introduced, but obviously it is now false in
> many cases (such as virtualization).
And NUMA.
> Ticket-based spinlocks have actually already changed the original
> design, so why not implement a generic "lock scheduler" on top of
> spinlock_t and rwlock_t?
How about making the semaphore / mutex code as fast as spinlocks and just
use that?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-26 17:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-05-06 19:26 Spinlocks waiting with interrupts disabled / preempt disabled Christoph Lameter
2008-05-07 7:30 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-05-07 17:04 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-05-07 17:24 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-05-07 18:49 ` Spinlocks: Factor our GENERIC_LOCKBREAK in order to avoid spin with irqs disable Christoph Lameter
2008-05-09 10:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-05-09 16:28 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-06-23 17:19 ` Petr Tesarik
2008-06-23 17:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-23 18:20 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-06-23 20:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-23 20:45 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-06-23 20:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-26 2:51 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-06-26 6:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-06-26 15:49 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-06-26 9:17 ` Petr Tesarik
2008-06-26 17:02 ` Christoph Lameter [this message]
2008-06-26 17:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-07-07 11:50 ` Nick Piggin
2008-07-07 11:52 ` Nick Piggin
2008-07-07 15:56 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-07-08 2:08 ` Nick Piggin
2008-07-07 15:53 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-07-07 19:46 ` Rik van Riel
2008-07-07 20:14 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-07-08 2:07 ` Nick Piggin
2008-07-08 5:57 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-07-08 8:41 ` Nick Piggin
2008-07-08 15:58 ` Jeremy Fitzhardinge
2008-05-09 16:35 ` Spinlocks waiting with interrupts disabled / preempt disabled Olaf Weber
2008-05-09 17:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-05-09 18:00 ` Christoph Lameter
2008-05-09 18:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2008-05-09 20:01 ` Olaf Weber
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=Pine.LNX.4.64.0806261001310.7369@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com \
--to=clameter@sgi.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=jeremy@goop.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=ptesarik@suse.cz \
/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®