| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2007 16:24:04 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] breaking the global file_list_lock * Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote: > On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 12:51:18PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > This patch-set breaks up the global file_list_lock which was found > > to be a severe contention point under basically any filesystem > > intensive workload. > > Benchmarks, please. Where exactly do you see contention for this? it's the most contended spinlock we have during a parallel kernel compile on an 8-way system. But it's pretty common-sense as well, without doing any measurements, it's basically the only global lock left in just about every VFS workload that doesnt involve massive amount of dentries created/removed (which is still dominated by the dcache_lock). > filesystem intensive workload apparently means namespace operation > heavy workload, right? The biggest bottleneck I've seen with those is > dcache lock. the dcache lock is not a problem during kernel compiles. (its rcu-ification works nicely in that workload) Ingo - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists