Re: [PATCH] Locking optimization for cache_reap

[Dimitri Sivanich]

On Mon, Jul 26, 2004 at 08:47:57PM -0500, Dimitri Sivanich wrote:
> 
> While you've got irq's disabled, drain_array() (the function my patch removes)
> acquires the cache spin_lock, then releases it.  Cache_reap then acquires
> it again (with irq's having been off the entire time).  My testing has found
> that simply acquiring the lock once while irq's are off results in fewer
> excessively long latencies.
> 
> Results probably vary somewhat depending on the circumstance.

Of course, I should add that all of this is from the perspective of the
cpu doing the cache_reap.  If others feel that this may add too much
latency to other paths, other solutions may be in order.
-
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/