Re: [RFC] [PATCH] To improve kretprobe scalability

[Abhishek Sagar]

On 5/21/08, Srinivasa D S <srinivasa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>  Solution:
>    1) Instead of having one global lock to protect kretprobe instances
>  present in kretprobe object and kretprobe hash table. We will have two locks,
>  one lock for protecting kretprobe hash table and another lock for kretporbe
>  object.

Is it possible to get rid of the kretprobe hash table itself and lose
the kretprobe_lock? It seems like it is just doing a pid-to-instance
mapping. These return instances could be queued in the "current"
task_struct in a LIFO manner. Mutation to this per-task list can be
done with local irqs off...

--
Regards,
Abhishek Sagar
--
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/