On Mon, Sep 11, 2000 at 04:44:21PM +0200, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, Michael T. Babcock wrote:
>
> >Considering there are a lot of people still using 2.0.x because they find it
> >more stable than the 2.2.x series, doesn't it make sense to give this
> >scalability to people who are already running SMP boxes on 2.2.x and who may
> >decide to use ReiserFS?
>
> Note that the thing isn't specific to reiserfs. All fs and networking (not
> firewalling) would benfit from that.
networking does it for a few kernel releases now, and it was a big
improvement in some benchmarks (probably not that much on real world
load)
>
> My point is that it's more productive to solve the last 2.4.x troubles
> (that still corrupts d'Itri's fs in test8) than to try to achieve better
> scalability performance with 2.2.x 8).
Given, but adding the unlock_kernel() does not really need much effort,
it is a very cheap (programmer time wise) optimization.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Sep 15 2000 - 21:00:15 EST