Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763732AbZAGXRv (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jan 2009 18:17:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1763336AbZAGXOi (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jan 2009 18:14:38 -0500 Received: from charybdis-ext.suse.de ([195.135.221.2]:60675 "EHLO emea5-mh.id5.novell.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932582AbZAGXOe (ORCPT ); Wed, 7 Jan 2009 18:14:34 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH -v5][RFC]: mutex: implement adaptive spinning From: "Peter W. Morreale" To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Gregory Haskins , Andi Kleen , Matthew Wilcox , Linus Torvalds , Steven Rostedt , Peter Zijlstra , paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Chris Mason , Andrew Morton , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-fsdevel , linux-btrfs , Thomas Gleixner , Nick Piggin , Sven Dietrich In-Reply-To: <1231368665.3470.513.camel@hermosa.site> References: <1231283778.11687.136.camel@twins> <1231329783.11687.287.camel@twins> <1231347442.11687.344.camel@twins> <20090107210923.GV2002@parisc-linux.org> <20090107213924.GP496@one.firstfloor.org> <49652C7C.3000909@novell.com> <20090107223317.GB27629@elte.hu> <1231368665.3470.513.camel@hermosa.site> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Linux Solutions Group Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2009 23:14:24 +0000 Message-Id: <1231370064.3470.516.camel@hermosa.site> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.1.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1012 Lines: 35 On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 15:51 -0700, Peter W. Morreale wrote: > On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 23:33 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Gregory Haskins wrote: > > > > > Can I ask a simple question in light of all this discussion? > > > > > > "Is get_task_struct() really that bad?" > > > > it dirties a cacheline and it also involves atomics. > > > > Also, it's a small design cleanliness issue to me: get_task_struct() > > impacts the lifetime of an object - and if a locking primitive has > > side-effects on object lifetimes that's never nice. > > > > True, but it's for one iteration * NR_CPUS, max. > > Best, > -PWM Never mind. Bogus argument. That's why we have you Big Guns out there... - To keep us rif-raf in line... :-) Best, -PWM -- 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/