From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 21 Mar 2001 07:32:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 21 Mar 2001 07:32:10 -0500 Received: from linuxcare.com.au ([203.29.91.49]:40714 "EHLO front.linuxcare.com.au") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 21 Mar 2001 07:32:00 -0500 From: Anton Blanchard Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 23:27:02 +1100 To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Linux Kernel List Subject: Re: [patch] pagecache SMP-scalability patch [was: spinlock usage] Message-ID: <20010321232701.A16455@linuxcare.com> In-Reply-To: <20010321180607.A11941@linuxcare.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.15i In-Reply-To: ; from mingo@elte.hu on Wed, Mar 21, 2001 at 01:11:35PM +0100 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, > http://people.redhat.com/~mingo/smp-pagecache-patches/pagecache-2.4.2-H1 > > this patch splits up the main scalability offender in non-RAM-limited > dbench runs, which is pagecache_lock. The patch was designed and written > by David Miller, and is being forward ported / maintained by me. (The new > pagecache lock design is similar to TCP's hashed spinlocks, which proved > to scale excellently.) Thanks Ingo! Davem told me about this a while ago but I had forgotten about it. I'll do some runs tomorrow including ones which dont fit in RAM. > (about lstat(): IMO lstat() should not call into the lowlevel FS code.) Ooops, sorry I meant stats as in statistics :) Anton