From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Thu, 26 Sep 2002 18:35:58 +0530 From: Dipankar Sarma Subject: Re: 2.5.38-mm3 Message-ID: <20020926183558.D18906@in.ibm.com> Reply-To: dipankar@in.ibm.com References: <3D92BE07.B6CDFE54@digeo.com> <20020926175445.B18906@in.ibm.com> <20020926122909.GN3530@holomorphy.com> <20020926181052.C18906@in.ibm.com> <20020926124244.GO3530@holomorphy.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20020926124244.GO3530@holomorphy.com>; from wli@holomorphy.com on Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 05:42:44AM -0700 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: William Lee Irwin III , Andrew Morton , lkml , "linux-mm@kvack.org" List-ID: On Thu, Sep 26, 2002 at 05:42:44AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote: > This is only aggravated by cacheline bouncing on SMP. The reductions > of system cpu time will doubtless be beneficial for all. On SMP, I would have thought that only sharing the fd table while cloning tasks (CLONE_FILES) affects performance by bouncing the rwlock cache line. Are there a lot of common workloads where this happens ? Anyway the files_struct_rcu patch for 2.5.38 is up at http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=8875&release_id=112473 Thanks -- Dipankar Sarma http://lse.sourceforge.net Linux Technology Center, IBM Software Lab, Bangalore, India. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/