[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A81B728.7040200@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2009 11:23:36 -0700
From: Zach Brown <zach.brown@...cle.com>
To: Manfred Spraul <manfred@...orfullife.com>
CC: npiggin@...e.de, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Nadia Derbey <Nadia.Derbey@...l.net>,
Pierre Peiffer <peifferp@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 4/4] ipc: sem optimise simple operations
Manfred Spraul wrote:
> On 08/11/2009 01:09 PM, npiggin@...e.de wrote:
>> Index: linux-2.6/include/linux/sem.h
>> ===================================================================
>> --- linux-2.6.orig/include/linux/sem.h
>> +++ linux-2.6/include/linux/sem.h
>> @@ -86,6 +86,8 @@ struct task_struct;
>> struct sem {
>> int semval; /* current value */
>> int sempid; /* pid of last operation */
>> + struct list_head negv_pending;
>> + struct list_head zero_pending;
>> };
>>
> struct sem is increased from 8 to 24 bytes.
And larger still with 64bit pointers.
If it's a problem, this can be scaled back. You can have pointers to
lists and you can have fewer lists.
Hopefully it won't be a problem, though. We can close our eyes and
pretend that the size of the semaphore sets scale with the size of the
system and that it's such a relatively small consumer of memory that no
one will notice :).
- z
--
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