Re: [PATCH 0/8] Drop host_lock around LLD SHT->queuecommand()caller

[Tim Chen]

On Fri, 2010-09-17 at 14:26 -0400, Jeff Garzik wrote:

> 
> But that raises the familiar tale of:  using multiple atomics (w/ their 
> locked instructions) may cost more than a spinlock.
> 

As brought up by James earlier, the scsi_host lock was used in so many
places that getting rid of it here to reduce contention for it will be a
net win, even with the cost of the atomics.  And for most LLDs that
don't need the serial number, we can just initialize it to zero for
those and have no need to increment it (thus also avoiding the atomics'
cost).

Tim

--
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/