From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 27 Sep 2001 15:42:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 27 Sep 2001 15:42:30 -0400 Received: from pizda.ninka.net ([216.101.162.242]:9862 "EHLO pizda.ninka.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 27 Sep 2001 15:42:21 -0400 Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 12:41:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20010927.124134.28787324.davem@redhat.com> To: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk Cc: torvalds@transmeta.com, bcrl@redhat.com, marcelo@conectiva.com.br, andrea@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Locking comment on shrink_caches() From: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: In-Reply-To: <20010926.162655.79011481.davem@redhat.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 2.0 on Emacs 21.0 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Alan Cox Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 13:10:49 +0100 (BST) See prefetching - the CPU prefetching will hide some of the effect and the spin_lock_prefetch() macro does wonders for the rest. Well, if prefetching can do it faster than avoiding the transaction altogether, I'm game :-) Franks a lot, David S. Miller davem@redhat.com