>Indeed. In cases like these, might it make some sense to have some fixed
>number of spinlocks and choose which to use with some reductive function?
Impacting runtime performances to SMP scale better, is going to lose
according to me. I think that if you want to SMP scale better it worth to
pay _only_ with memory wastage and _not_ with wasted CPU cycles.
But as just said masp0008 raised the issue of the io_request_lock that is
just held all the time so we can't scale better at all even using one
spinlock per bit of memory in the machine :-). This is the only thing that
obviously convinced me to remove the spinlock immediatly.
My latest code is placed here. masp0008 feel free to give it a review.
ftp://e-mind.com/pub/andrea/kernel-patches/buffer-2.2.9-L.gz
Thanks.
Andrea Arcangeli
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/