Re: [RFC] New locking primitive for 2.5

Andrew Morton
2002-02-08T18:55:46Z

Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, Martin Wirth wrote:
> >
> > There are currently several attempts discussed to push out the
> > BKL and replace it by a semaphore e.g. the next step Robert Love
> > planned for his ll_seek patch (replace the BKL by inode i_sem).
>
> But that won't have any contention anyway, so it's a non-issue.
>

Yesterday, Ingo said:

> i think one example *could* be to turn inode->i_sem into a combi-lock. Eg.
> generic_file_llseek() could use the spin variant.
>
> this is a real performance problem, i've seen scheduling storms in
> dbench-type runs due to llseek taking the inode semaphore.

-