linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH RFC ticketlock] Auto-queued ticketlock

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 11 Jun 2013 11:22:45 -0400
From:	Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:	paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc:	Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
	Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@...ibm.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
	Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>, niv@...ibm.com,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Valdis Kletnieks <Valdis.Kletnieks@...edu>,
	David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Darren Hart <darren@...art.com>,
	Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	sbw@....edu
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC ticketlock] Auto-queued ticketlock

On Tue, 2013-06-11 at 03:14 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>  
> > Off-topic, although I am in this community for several years,
> > I am not exactly clear with this problem.
> > 
> > 1) In general case, which lock is the most competitive in the kernel? what it protects for?
> > 2) In which special case, which lock is the most competitive in the kernel? what it protects for?
> > 3) In general case, which list is the most hot list?
> > 4) In which special case, which list is the most hot list?
> 
> Others would know better than I, but mmap_sem has been called out as a

If the contention is with mmap_sem, then I doubt this is going to help
much, as that's a sleeping rw semaphore. Now, rw semaphores are
implemented with raw spinlocks, but I doubt that would be the main point
of contention, compared to the sleeping part.

-- Steve

> prime offender for some workloads.  There is of course some debate as
> to whether the fault lies mmap_sem or with the workloads.  There have
> been some efforts to solve this one on LKML, plus some in academia have
> worked on this as well:
> 


--
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/