Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:53:03 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:52:55 -0500 Received: from perninha.conectiva.com.br ([200.250.58.156]:5384 "HELO perninha.conectiva.com.br") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:52:37 -0500 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 15:52:16 -0200 (BRST) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: To: Davide Libenzi Cc: Rusty Russell , "David S. Miller" , , "Martin J. Bligh" , , Alan Cox , , lkml Subject: Re: SMP/cc Cluster description In-Reply-To: Message-ID: X-spambait: aardvark@kernelnewbies.org X-spammeplease: aardvark@nl.linux.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, Davide Libenzi wrote: > > Machines get dragged down by _uncontended_ locks, simply > > due to cache line ping-pong effects. > > Rik, i think you're confused about lockless algos. > It's not an rwlock where the reader has to dirty a cacheline in any case, > the reader simply does _not_ write any cache line accessing the > list/hash/tree or whatever you use. Hmmm indeed, so the cache lines can be shared as long as the data is mostly read-only. I think I see it now. However, this would only work for data which is mostly read-only, not for anything else... Rik -- DMCA, SSSCA, W3C? Who cares? http://thefreeworld.net/ http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ - 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/