Re: [PATCH] mm/hugetlb: per-vma instantiation mutexes

[Andrew Morton]

On Mon, 15 Jul 2013 17:24:32 +1000 David Gibson <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> I have previously proposed a correct method of improving scalability,
> although it doesn't eliminate the lock.  That's to use a set of hashed
> mutexes.

Yep - hashing the mutexes is an obvious and nicely localized way of
improving this.  It's a tweak, not a design change.

The changelog should describe the choice of the hash key with great
precision, please.  It's important and is the first thing which
reviewers and readers will zoom in on.

Should the individual mutexes be cacheline aligned?  Depends on the
acquisition frequency, I guess.  Please let's work through that.

Let's not damage uniprocesor kernels too much.  AFACIT the main offender
here is fault_mutex_hash(), which is the world's most obfuscated "return
0;".

>  It wasn't merged before, but I don't recall the reasons
> why. 

Me either.
--
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/