From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (smtp1.linux-foundation.org [172.17.192.35]) by mail.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9BC2E487 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 14:03:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ig0-f193.google.com (mail-ig0-f193.google.com [209.85.213.193]) by smtp1.linuxfoundation.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2FD3B15E for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 14:03:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: by igbqa2 with SMTP id qa2so12643543igb.0 for ; Wed, 22 Jul 2015 07:03:30 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20150709190916.GI1522@ret.masoncoding.com> References: <20150709190916.GI1522@ret.masoncoding.com> Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 22:03:30 +0800 Message-ID: From: Lai Jiangshan To: Chris Mason , Andy Lutomirski , "ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Peter Zijlstra , Mathieu Desnoyers , Jens Axboe , Shaohua Li , "Paul E. McKenney" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Subject: Re: [Ksummit-discuss] [CORE TOPIC] lightweight per-cpu locks / restartable sequences List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 3:09 AM, Chris Mason wrote: > > We've started experimenting with these to cut overheads in a few > critical places, and while we don't have numbers yet I really hope it > won't take too long. > > I think the topic is really interesting and we'll be able to get numbers > from production workloads to help justify and compare different > approaches. > I was interested by the idea since Paul(paulmck) and Mathieu introduced it to me at the K.S. 2013. I didn't expect it is re-posted on LKML so late. IMHO, the direction is useful and helpful not just only fun, I hope we can make some progress on it. Thanks Lai > -chris > _______________________________________________ > Ksummit-discuss mailing list > Ksummit-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/ksummit-discuss