linux-kernel - Re: queued spinlock code and results

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0707101348020.3055@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date:	Tue, 10 Jul 2007 13:52:47 -0700 (PDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
cc:	Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: queued spinlock code and results

On Sun, 8 Jul 2007, Andi Kleen wrote:

> I would say the main drawback of switchable and queued locks 
> would be also that they require a larger spinlock_t thus increasing
> cache usage

Right. Zoran Radovic has shown that queued locks are inferior 
to other approaches. The best approach that he found in his research were 
the HBO locks that are somewhat more intelligent form of spinlocks.

http://user.it.uu.se/~zoranr/
http://www.it.uu.se/research/group/uart/projects/nucasynch/

Paper on the issue with measurements:
http://www.it.uu.se/research/publications/lic/2003-008/2003-008.pdf
-
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/