Re: smp overhead, and rwlocks considered harmful

From: Anton Blanchard (anton@samba.org)
Date: Sat Mar 22 2003 - 22:55:23 EST

Next message: Andrew Morton: "Re: smp overhead, and rwlocks considered harmful"
Previous message: Zwane Mwaikambo: "Re: aic7(censored) dying horribly in 2.5.65-mm2"
In reply to: Andrew Morton: "smp overhead, and rwlocks considered harmful"
Next in thread: Andrew Morton: "Re: smp overhead, and rwlocks considered harmful"
Reply: Andrew Morton: "Re: smp overhead, and rwlocks considered harmful"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

> One thing is noteworthy: ia32's read_unlock() is buslocked, whereas
> spin_unlock() is not.

Dont forget bitops/atomics used as spinlocks like the rmap pte chain lock.

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

Next message: Andrew Morton: "Re: smp overhead, and rwlocks considered harmful"
Previous message: Zwane Mwaikambo: "Re: aic7(censored) dying horribly in 2.5.65-mm2"
In reply to: Andrew Morton: "smp overhead, and rwlocks considered harmful"
Next in thread: Andrew Morton: "Re: smp overhead, and rwlocks considered harmful"
Reply: Andrew Morton: "Re: smp overhead, and rwlocks considered harmful"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Mar 23 2003 - 22:00:43 EST