[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090107223317.GB27629@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 23:33:17 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Matthew Wilcox <matthew@....cx>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Chris Mason <chris.mason@...cle.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-btrfs <linux-btrfs@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
Peter Morreale <pmorreale@...ell.com>,
Sven Dietrich <SDietrich@...ell.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v5][RFC]: mutex: implement adaptive spinning
* Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com> 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.
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