Thread (20 messages) 20 messages, 2 authors, 2007-01-29

Re: [PATCH 00/14] Concurrent Page Cache

From: Christoph Lameter <hidden>
Date: 2007-01-29 18:16:14
Also in: lkml

On Mon, 29 Jan 2007, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Ladder locking would end up:

lock A0
lock B1
unlock A0 -> a new operation can start
lock C2
unlock B1
lock D5
unlock C2
** we do stuff to D5
unlock D5
Instead of taking one lock we would need to take 4? Wont doing so cause 
significant locking overhead? We probably would want to run some 
benchmarks. Maybe disable the scheme for systems with a small number of 
processors?


--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help