From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-mm@kvack.org
Subject: Re: SLUB: Avoid atomic operation for slab_unlock
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 18:21:00 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710181817380.4194@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200710190949.01019.nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
On Fri, 19 Oct 2007, Nick Piggin wrote:
> Ah, thanks, but can we just use my earlier patch that does the
> proper __bit_spin_unlock which is provided by
> bit_spin_lock-use-lock-bitops.patch
Ok.
> This primitive should have a better chance at being correct, and
> also potentially be more optimised for each architecture (it
> only has to provide release consistency).
Yes that is what I attempted to do with the write barrier. To my knowledge
there are no reads that could bleed out and I wanted to avoid a full fence
instruction there.
> I have attached the patch here just for reference, but actually
> I am submitting it properly as part of a patch series today, now
> that the base bit lock patches have been sent upstream.
Good. Andrew: Drop my patch when this goes in.
--
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/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-19 1:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-10-18 22:15 SLUB: Avoid atomic operation for slab_unlock Christoph Lameter
2007-10-18 22:31 ` Andrew Morton
2007-10-18 23:49 ` Nick Piggin
2007-10-19 1:21 ` Christoph Lameter [this message]
2007-10-19 1:56 ` Nick Piggin
2007-10-19 2:01 ` Christoph Lameter
2007-10-19 2:12 ` Nick Piggin
2007-10-19 3:26 ` [IA64] Reduce __clear_bit_unlock overhead Christoph Lameter
2007-10-19 11:20 ` SLUB: Avoid atomic operation for slab_unlock Christoph Lameter
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=Pine.LNX.4.64.0710181817380.4194@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com \
--to=clameter@sgi.com \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mm@kvack.org \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).