Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:00:24 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 13:00:11 -0500 Received: from mail.xmailserver.org ([208.129.208.52]:28422 "EHLO mail.xmailserver.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 12:59:47 -0500 Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:10:51 -0800 (PST) From: Davide Libenzi X-X-Sender: davide@blue1.dev.mcafeelabs.com To: Rik van Riel cc: Rusty Russell , "David S. Miller" , , "Martin J. Bligh" , , Alan Cox , , lkml Subject: Re: SMP/cc Cluster description In-Reply-To: Message-ID: 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, Rik van Riel wrote: > 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... yes of course, but in such case these methods could help solving cache issues over traditional rwlocks. - Davide - 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/