Re: [patch] inode-lock-break.patch, 2.6.8-rc3-mm2

[Ingo Molnar]

* Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx> 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
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/