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: Sat, 23 Feb 2008 00:03:45 -0800 From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org> To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> Cc: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, tglx@...utronix.de, rostedt@...dmis.org, linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bill.huey@...il.com, kevin@...man.org, cminyard@...sta.com, dsingleton@...sta.com, dwalker@...sta.com, npiggin@...e.de, dsaxena@...xity.net, ak@...e.de, gregkh@...e.de, sdietrich@...ell.com, pmorreale@...ell.com, mkohari@...ell.com Subject: Re: [PATCH [RT] 00/14] RFC - adaptive real-time locks On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 22:24:20 +0100 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote: > regarding the concept: adaptive mutexes have been talked about in the > past, but their advantage is not at all clear, that's why we havent done > them. It's definitely not an unambigiously win-win concept. When ext3 was converted from sleeping locks to spinlocks, dbench-on-numaq throughput went up by a factor of ten. I'd expect that what RT has done was a truly awful change for lots of workloads on lots of machines. Yeah, there's the dont-enable-it-if-you're-doing-that option, but that adds the we-just-doubled-the-number-of-kernels-distros-need-to-ship problem. Does -rt also make bit_spin_lock preemptible? If not, I'd have thought the change was of little benefit to ext3/jbd and it might as well go back to spinning locks. -- 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