Re: ipc,sem: sysv semaphore scalability

[Rik van Riel]

On 03/21/2013 06:01 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Mar 2013 17:50:05 -0400 Peter Hurley <peter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 2013-03-21 at 14:10 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 15:55:30 -0400 Rik van Riel <riel@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > > This series makes the sysv semaphore code more scalable,
> > > > by reducing the time the semaphore lock is held, and making
> > > > the locking more scalable for semaphore arrays with multiple
> > > > semaphores.
> > > >
> > > > The first four patches were written by Davidlohr Buesso, and
> > > > reduce the hold time of the semaphore lock.
> > > >
> > > > The last three patches change the sysv semaphore code locking
> > > > to be more fine grained, providing a performance boost when
> > > > multiple semaphores in a semaphore array are being manipulated
> > > > simultaneously.
> > >
> > > These patches conflict pretty badly with Peter's:
> >
> > On one point I'm a little confused: my series has been in linux-next for
> > a while. On what tree is this series based?
>
> It'll be based on mainline.  People often forget to peek into
> linux-next when preparing patches.  In the great majority of cases
> that's OK.  Occasionally, we lose...

I'll be happy to rebase the series onto linux-next, to make
merging easier for you.

--
All rights reversed.
--
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/