Re: why are we reduce spin-lock and replace it with lock-free?

[Alan Cox]

On Thu, 10 May 2007 22:23:32 +0800
"liang yuanen" <linux.kernel.liang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Three are many many spin-lock in the kernel code, and in multi-core
> conditions, it push down the kernel performance.why are we reduce
> spin-lock and replace it with lock-free?

If you can find algorithms which are lock free, faster than taking the
lock and have bounded resource consumption then you can test them with
the kernel and send patches. 

Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/