Re: [PATCH 1/1] mlock: split the shmlock_user_lock spinlock into per user_struct spinlock

[Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>]

On 05/03/2012 03:31 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-05-03 at 23:04 +0530, rajman mekaco wrote:
>> The user_shm_lock and user_shm_unlock functions use a single global
>> spinlock for protecting the user->locked_shm.
>
> Are you very sure its only protecting user state? This changelog doesn't
> convince me you've gone through everything and found it good.
>
>> This is an overhead for multiple CPUs calling this code even if they
>> are having different user_struct.
>>
>> Remove the global shmlock_user_lock and introduce and use a new
>> spinlock inside of the user_struct structure.
>
> While I don't immediately see anything wrong with it, I doubt its
> useful. What workload run with enough users that this makes a difference
> one way or another?

When running with containers and/or LXC, I believe that
each UID in each container gets its own user_struct, but
you do raise a good question - what user programs call
mlock anyway, and how often?

--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>