From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Robin Holt Subject: Re: [Patch V3 0/3] Enable irqs when waiting for rwlocks Date: Wed, 3 Dec 2008 05:37:44 -0600 Message-ID: <20081203113744.GE8970@sgi.com> References: <20081104122405.046233722@attica.americas.sgi.com> <20081202161311.ae3376cb.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from relay2.sgi.com ([192.48.179.30]:51987 "EHLO relay.sgi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751351AbYLCLhs (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Dec 2008 06:37:48 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20081202161311.ae3376cb.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Andrew Morton Cc: holt@sgi.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, ptesarik@suse.cz, tee@sgi.com, peterz@infradead.org, mingo@elte.hu, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org > It's a bit regrettable to have different architectures behaving in > different ways. It would be interesting to toss an x86_64 > implementation into the grinder, see if it causes any problems, see if > it produces any tangible benefits. Then other architectures might > follow. Or not, depending on the results ;) I personally expect SGI to work on this for x86_64 in the future. Once we actually start testing systems with 128 and above cpus, I would expect to see these performance issues needing to be addressed. Until then, it is just a theoretical. Thank you for your help, Robin Holt