From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S266476AbUHILWI (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Aug 2004 07:22:08 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S266481AbUHILWI (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Aug 2004 07:22:08 -0400 Received: from mx1.elte.hu ([157.181.1.137]:15269 "EHLO mx1.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S266476AbUHILWF (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Aug 2004 07:22:05 -0400 Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2004 12:45:33 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Andrew Morton Cc: viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [patch] inode-lock-break.patch, 2.6.8-rc3-mm2 Message-ID: <20040809104533.GA13710@elte.hu> References: <20040809102125.GA12391@elte.hu> <20040809032523.40250fe8.akpm@osdl.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040809032523.40250fe8.akpm@osdl.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-ELTE-SpamVersion: MailScanner 4.31.6-itk1 (ELTE 1.2) SpamAssassin 2.63 ClamAV 0.73 X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-4.9, required 5.9, autolearn=not spam, BAYES_00 -4.90 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamScore: -4 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Andrew Morton wrote: > > tested on x86, the patch solves these particular latencies. > > On uniprocessor only. What are we going to do about SMP? i believe we should 'ignore' SMP spinlock starvation for now: it will be fixed in a natural way with the most-spinlocks-are-mutexes solution, with that approach all preemption wishes of other CPUs are properly expressed in terms of need_resched(). alternatively the 'release the lock every 128 iterations and do a cpu_relax()' hack could be used - but i think that doesnt solve the SMP issues in a sufficiant way. Ingo