From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Bill Huey <bhuey@lnxw.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
davidsen@tmr.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch] remove the BKL (Big Kernel Lock), this time for real
Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 08:43:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20040917064321.GA8146@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040916225102.GA4386@nietzsche.lynx.com>
* Bill Huey <bhuey@lnxw.com> wrote:
> Judging from how the Linux code is done and the numbers I get from
> Bill Irwin in casual conversation, the Linux SMP approach is clearly
> the right track at this time with it's hand honed per-CPU awareness of
> things. The only serious problem that spinlocks have as they aren't
> preemptable, which is what Ingo is trying to fix.
a clarification: note that the current BKL is a special case. No way do
i suggest that the BKS is the proper model for any SMP implementation.
It is a narrow special-case because it wraps historic UP-only kernel
code.
our primary multiprocessing primitives are still the following 4:
lockless data structures, RCU, spinlocks and mutexes. (reverse ordered
by level of parallelism.) The BKS is basically a fifth method, a special
type of semaphore that i'd never want to be seen used by any new SMP
code. It is completely local to sched.c.
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-09-17 6:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <2EJTp-7bx-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
2004-09-15 15:46 ` [patch] remove the BKL (Big Kernel Lock), this time for real Andi Kleen
2004-09-15 15:58 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-15 20:11 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-16 1:17 ` Nick Piggin
2004-09-16 14:28 ` Bill Davidsen
2004-09-16 22:29 ` Bill Huey
2004-09-16 22:40 ` David S. Miller
2004-09-16 22:51 ` Bill Huey
2004-09-16 22:54 ` David S. Miller
2004-09-16 23:01 ` Bill Huey
2004-09-16 23:33 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-17 6:43 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2004-09-17 7:21 ` Tony Lee
2004-09-18 5:44 Manfred Spraul
2004-09-18 13:09 ` Ingo Molnar
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-09-15 15:18 Ingo Molnar
2004-09-15 15:40 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-09-15 15:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-15 17:04 ` Ricky Beam
2004-09-15 19:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-15 18:28 ` Chris Wedgwood
2004-09-15 21:25 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-17 10:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-17 12:53 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-17 20:56 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-09-18 8:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2004-09-18 23:36 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-09-17 13:26 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-09-17 13:47 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-17 13:56 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-09-17 14:18 ` William Lee Irwin III
2004-09-17 15:16 ` Linus Torvalds
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20040917064321.GA8146@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=bhuey@lnxw.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=davidsen@tmr.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.