[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20230105185909.c77ce4d136279ec46a204d61@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2023 18:59:09 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Hongchen Zhang <zhanghongchen@...ngson.cn>
Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.co.jp>,
Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@...adoo.fr>,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] pipe: use __pipe_{lock,unlock} instead of spinlock
On Tue, 3 Jan 2023 14:33:03 +0800 Hongchen Zhang <zhanghongchen@...ngson.cn> wrote:
> Use spinlock in pipe_read/write cost too much time,IMO
> pipe->{head,tail} can be protected by __pipe_{lock,unlock}.
> On the other hand, we can use __pipe_lock/unlock to protect the
> pipe->head/tail in pipe_resize_ring and post_one_notification.
Can you please test this with the test code in Linus's 0ddad21d3e99 and
check that performance is good?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists