Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: Announce: Semaphore-Removal tree | From | Daniel Walker <> | Date | Fri, 25 Apr 2008 14:22:31 -0700 |
| |
On Fri, 2008-04-25 at 17:12 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Apr 25, 2008 at 01:38:37PM -0700, Daniel Walker wrote: > > I was reviewing your patches, and I don't like the semaphore to spinlock > > changes.. There's no reason to start adding spinlocks, unless it's > > really performance sensitive which none of those places are.. > > Yes, there is. The spinlock is our most efficient locking primitive > for the normal mostly un-contentded case. Please get out of your > realtime-ghetto.
If you can make a case for converting some semaphores to spinlocks be my guest .. If you have good reasoning I wouldn't stand in the way.. (Real time converts all the spinlocks to mutexes anyway ..)
Daniel
| |