[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090107153520.b91b5956.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 15:35:20 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: holt@....com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ia64@...r.kernel.org,
ptesarik@...e.cz, tee@....com, holt@....com, peterz@...radead.org,
mingo@...e.hu, "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch V3 0/3] Enable irqs when waiting for rwlocks
On Tue, 04 Nov 2008 06:24:05 -0600
holt@....com wrote:
> New in V3:
> * Handle rearrangement of some arch's include/asm directories.
>
> New in V2:
> * get rid of ugly #ifdef's in kernel/spinlock.h
> * convert __raw_{read|write}_lock_flags to an inline func
>
> SGI has observed that on large systems, interrupts are not serviced for
> a long period of time when waiting for a rwlock. The following patch
> series re-enables irqs while waiting for the lock, resembling the code
> which is already there for spinlocks.
>
> I only made the ia64 version, because the patch adds some overhead to
> the fast path. I assume there is currently no demand to have this for
> other architectures, because the systems are not so large. Of course,
> the possibility to implement raw_{read|write}_lock_flags for any
> architecture is still there.
>
I'm not seeing any Tony Luck acks on this work?
--
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