From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932564AbYDYVWn (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Apr 2008 17:22:43 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759929AbYDYVWg (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Apr 2008 17:22:36 -0400 Received: from homer.mvista.com ([63.81.120.158]:13022 "EHLO gateway-1237.mvista.com" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759204AbYDYVWf (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Apr 2008 17:22:35 -0400 Subject: Re: Announce: Semaphore-Removal tree From: Daniel Walker To: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Matthew Wilcox , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Stephen Rothwell In-Reply-To: <20080425211250.GA13858@infradead.org> References: <20080425170021.GH14990@parisc-linux.org> <1209155917.12461.46.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080425211250.GA13858@infradead.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 14:22:31 -0700 Message-Id: <1209158552.12461.53.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.3 (2.12.3-3.fc8) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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