From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751580AbZHQNBW (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Aug 2009 09:01:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751204AbZHQNBV (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Aug 2009 09:01:21 -0400 Received: from mail-bw0-f222.google.com ([209.85.218.222]:54247 "EHLO mail-bw0-f222.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750872AbZHQNBV (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Aug 2009 09:01:21 -0400 Message-ID: <4A8954F8.7040602@colorfullife.com> Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2009 15:02:48 +0200 From: Manfred Spraul User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.1) Gecko/20090814 Fedora/3.0-2.6.b3.fc11 Thunderbird/3.0b3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Nick Piggin CC: Andrew Morton , Nadia Derbey , Pierre Peiffer , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] [patch 4a/4] ipc: sem optimise simple operations References: <200908141946.n7EJkh7B018160@mail.q-ag.de> <20090815045237.GC19195@wotan.suse.de> <4A86899A.6050502@colorfullife.com> <20090815103820.GC8954@wotan.suse.de> <4A86ABF0.2070207@colorfullife.com> <20090815144908.GA30951@wotan.suse.de> <4A86E30E.8030208@colorfullife.com> <20090816103127.GB8644@wotan.suse.de> <4A87ED93.5060104@colorfullife.com> <20090817064446.GD9962@wotan.suse.de> In-Reply-To: <20090817064446.GD9962@wotan.suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 08/17/2009 08:44 AM, Nick Piggin wrote: > OK, well let's just get something in. > Good, I would propose the that the following 7 patches should be merged: http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/11/59 http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/11/9 http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/11/14 http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/15/163 http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/15/164 http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/15/167 http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/8/15/168 Nick: is that ok from your point of view? > That said, I'm not too unhappy with your version if you feel strongly > about it. I would prefer it: We simply don't know if a wait-for-zero list, only for single sop operations, is a step in the right direction. Postgres uses single sop operations with just +-1 on one semaphore. You wrote that your SAP workload also uses +-1. According to google codesearch, apache, mozilla, mpich all use +-1. Thus: Who uses single sop, wait for zero? I'm just afraid that we optimize for the wrong case. -- Manfred