From: Dave Hansen <haveblue@us.ibm.com>
To: Oliver Neukum <oliver@neukum.name>
Cc: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>,
kernel-janitor-discuss
<kernel-janitor-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: BKL removal
Date: Sun, 07 Jul 2002 14:58:22 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3D28B97E.3050401@us.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: 200207072328.34244.oliver@neukum.name
Oliver Neukum wrote:
>>> I would mind the BKL a lot less if it was as well understood
>>> everywhere as it is in VFS. The funny part is that a lock like
>>> the BKL would not last very long if it were well understood or
>>> documented everywhere it was used.
>>
>> I would mind it a whole lot less if when you try to remove the
>> BKL, you do it correctly. So far it seems like you enjoy doing
>> "hit and run" patches, without even fully understanding or
>> testing your patches out (the driverfs and input layer patches
>> are proof of that.) This does nothing but aggravate the
>> developers who have to go clean up after you.
>>
>> Also, stay away from instances of it's use WHERE IT DOES NOT
>> MATTER for performance. If I grab the BKL on insertion or
>> removal of a USB device, who cares? I know you are trying to
>> remove it entirely out of the kernel, but please focus on places
>> where it actually helps, and leave the other instances alone.
>
> If you really want to make maximum impact, do tests. Very few
> people can measure lock contention on a 4-CPU system.
Do you mean "see lock contention", or "have the hardware to measure
lock contention"? We probably use lockmeter more than just about
anyone else. But, I do not, nor have I ever contended, that things
like driverfs's BKL use have a performance impact. I just consider
them messy, and bad practice.
> And please rest assured that nobody wants to be maintainer of the
> subsystem that ruins scalability.
I agree completely. All of the maintainers who are handed data that
shows bad BKL contention have either done something about it, or are
doing something about it now. 2.5 is 2 orders of magnitude better
than 2.4 for BKL contention in most of the workloads that I see.
> And if you see a use of the BKL you don't understand ask first, or
> send a patch to the subsystem's mailing list, not lkml. People will
> look at BKL usage if you ask. In fact such a look might even
> uncover bugs as in case of USB.
I guess I got discouraged by a few non-responsive mailing lists in the
past. I'll make an effort to use them more in the future.
--
Dave Hansen
haveblue@us.ibm.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-07-07 21:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 95+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.44L.0207061306440.8346-100000@imladris.surriel.com>
[not found] ` <3D27390E.5060208@us.ibm.com>
2002-07-07 20:55 ` BKL removal Greg KH
2002-07-07 21:28 ` Oliver Neukum
2002-07-07 21:58 ` Dave Hansen [this message]
2002-07-07 22:38 ` Oliver Neukum
2002-07-07 21:35 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-07 21:55 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-07-07 22:42 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-07 23:07 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-07-07 23:23 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-07 23:34 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-07-07 23:42 ` Sean Neakums
2002-07-07 23:31 ` Oliver Neukum
2002-07-07 23:45 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-08 2:34 ` Matthew Wilcox
2002-07-08 2:52 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-08 3:06 ` Alexander Viro
2002-07-08 12:33 ` Matthew Wilcox
2002-07-08 14:53 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-08 12:29 ` Matthew Wilcox
2002-07-08 2:58 ` Alexander Viro
2002-07-08 3:06 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-08 12:15 ` Matthew Wilcox
2002-07-08 6:34 ` Oliver Neukum
2002-07-07 23:23 ` Oliver Neukum
2002-07-07 23:31 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-07 23:51 ` Greg KH
2002-07-08 0:07 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-08 2:12 ` Greg KH
2002-07-09 1:46 ` Rick Lindsley
2002-07-09 4:38 ` Greg KH
2002-07-09 19:31 ` Rick Lindsley
2002-07-09 20:17 ` Greg KH
2002-07-09 20:55 ` Rick Lindsley
2002-07-09 21:00 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-07-09 21:12 ` Robert Love
2002-07-09 14:19 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-09 21:29 ` Robert Love
2002-07-09 14:44 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-09 21:47 ` Robert Love
2002-07-10 1:15 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2002-07-10 3:27 ` Alexander Viro
2002-07-09 20:49 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-10 5:30 ` Alexander Viro
2002-07-10 10:28 ` Sandy Harris
2002-07-18 0:30 ` David Wagner
2002-07-18 1:03 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-07-09 21:59 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-07-09 22:21 ` Alan Cox
2002-07-10 13:31 ` jlnance
2002-07-10 14:17 ` Alan Cox
2002-07-15 20:53 ` Alexander Hoogerhuis
2002-07-15 22:07 ` Rik van Riel
2002-07-15 22:25 ` Thunder from the hill
2002-07-09 19:33 ` Rick Lindsley
2002-07-09 20:12 ` Greg KH
2002-07-09 4:49 ` Drew P. Vogel
2002-07-09 5:25 ` Dave Hansen
2002-07-09 5:21 ` Larry McVoy
2002-07-09 7:59 ` Roman Zippel
2002-07-10 10:03 ` Marco Colombo
2002-07-10 14:40 ` Matthew Wilcox
2002-07-10 16:46 ` William Lee Irwin III
2002-07-11 9:57 ` Marco Colombo
2002-07-10 21:28 ` Rick Lindsley
2002-07-10 22:24 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-07-10 23:36 ` spinlock assertion macros Jesse Barnes
2002-07-11 0:54 ` Andreas Dilger
2002-07-11 1:10 ` Jesse Barnes
2002-07-11 5:31 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-07-11 7:19 ` george anzinger
2002-07-11 16:35 ` Oliver Xymoron
2002-07-11 23:52 ` Sandy Harris
2002-07-12 0:56 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-07-12 3:22 ` Oliver Xymoron
2002-07-11 18:03 ` Jesse Barnes
2002-07-11 19:17 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-07-12 12:07 ` Dave Jones
2002-07-12 12:55 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-07-12 19:24 ` Arnd Bergmann
2002-07-12 17:42 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-07-17 2:22 ` Jesse Barnes
2002-07-17 6:34 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-07-18 23:36 ` [PATCH] spinlock assertion macros for 2.5.26 Jesse Barnes
2002-07-17 11:09 ` spinlock assertion macros Arnd Bergmann
2002-07-12 20:41 ` Oliver Xymoron
2002-07-13 3:21 ` Daniel Phillips
2002-07-12 17:49 ` Robert Love
2002-07-12 17:58 ` Dave Jones
2002-07-11 10:51 ` Arnd Bergmann
2002-07-07 22:24 ` BKL removal Greg KH
2002-07-08 0:56 ` Bernd Eckenfels
2002-07-10 0:30 ` Pavel Machek
[not found] <0C01A29FBAE24448A792F5C68F5EA47D2B0C8A@nasdaq.ms.ensim.com>
2002-07-08 19:00 ` pmenage
2002-07-08 21:45 ` Oliver Neukum
2002-07-10 7:32 dan carpenter
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=3D28B97E.3050401@us.ibm.com \
--to=haveblue@us.ibm.com \
--cc=greg@kroah.com \
--cc=kernel-janitor-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=oliver@neukum.name \
/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