Re: 2.5.69-mm1

Dipankar Sarma (dipankar@in.ibm.com)
Tue, 6 May 2003 21:17:55 +0530


On Tue, May 06, 2003 at 07:20:51AM -0700, David S. Miller wrote:
> From: Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com>
>
> Provided there isn't a very heavy contention among readers for the
> spin_lock.
>
> Even if there are thousands of readers trying to get the lock
> at the same time, unless your hold time is significant these
> readers will merely thrash the cache getting the rwlock_t.
> And then thrash it again to release the rwlock_t.

And now ISTR that this is indeed the case, atleast going by
what we saw with "chat" microbenchmarks (fwiw :)).
Hold times weren't very high and most of the performance penalty
came from bouncing of the rwlock cacheline, which prompted us to
write a RCU-based patch for lockfree lookup from fd table.

Thanks
Dipankar
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/