[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1362645933.2606.14.camel@laptop>
Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 09:45:33 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Waiman Long <Waiman.Long@...com>,
Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr.bueso@...com>,
Emmanuel Benisty <benisty.e@...il.com>,
"Vinod, Chegu" <chegu_vinod@...com>,
"Low, Jason" <jason.low2@...com>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>, aquini@...hat.com,
Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Larry Woodman <lwoodman@...hat.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, chris.mason@...ionio.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/4] ipc: reduce ipc lock contention
On Tue, 2013-03-05 at 15:53 -0500, Rik van Riel wrote:
> Indeed. Though how well my patches will work with Oracle will
> depend a lot on what kind of semctl syscalls they are doing.
>
> Does Oracle typically do one semop per semctl syscall, or does
> it pass in a whole bunch at once?
https://oss.oracle.com/~mason/sembench.c
I think Chris wrote that to match a particular pattern of semaphore
operations the database engine in question does. I haven't checked to
see if it triggers the case in point though.
Also, Chris since left Oracle but maybe he knows who to poke.
--
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