Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 29 Sep 1999 13:53:42 +0200 | From | Martin Mares <> | Subject | Re: possible spinlock optimizations |
| |
Hello, world!\n
> But, Ingo, are we going to add udelay(5000) into slow path to make > sure some abstract guy has motivation? Should we add udelay(5000) into > select() in order to make people use poll()? > > Certainly not. > > I think that our slow path should be optimized, too. No need to talk > about abstract bugs. No matter how finegrained our locks are, under > some workload they still will content, and that's why it is good to > optimize it, too.
If the contention is high, lock optimizations won't save us. If it's low, lock optimizations might be just unnecessary complexity. KISS rule.
Have a nice fortnight -- Martin `MJ' Mares <mj@ucw.cz> http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~mj/ Faculty of Math and Physics, Charles University, Prague, Czech Rep., Earth "I love complete delivery - with the screwdriver."
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |