Re: [PATCH 1/1] mlock: split the shmlock_user_lock spinlock intoper user_struct spinlock

[Rik van Riel]

On 05/03/2012 03:31 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 23:04 +0530, rajman mekaco wrote:
> > The user_shm_lock and user_shm_unlock functions use a single global
> > spinlock for protecting the user->locked_shm.
>
> Are you very sure its only protecting user state? This changelog doesn't
> convince me you've gone through everything and found it good.
>
> > This is an overhead for multiple CPUs calling this code even if they
> > are having different user_struct.
> >
> > Remove the global shmlock_user_lock and introduce and use a new
> > spinlock inside of the user_struct structure.
>
> While I don't immediately see anything wrong with it, I doubt its
> useful. What workload run with enough users that this makes a difference
> one way or another?

When running with containers and/or LXC, I believe that
each UID in each container gets its own user_struct, but
you do raise a good question - what user programs call
mlock anyway, and how often?
--
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/