From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from psmtp.com (na3sys010amx114.postini.com [74.125.245.114]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 50F0C6B0044 for ; Thu, 10 May 2012 12:48:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: by obbwd18 with SMTP id wd18so2834533obb.14 for ; Thu, 10 May 2012 09:48:46 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1336066477-3964-1-git-send-email-rajman.mekaco@gmail.com> <4FA2C946.60006@redhat.com> <4FA2EA4A.6040703@redhat.com> <4FABD6BE.1060401@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 22:18:46 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] mlock: split the shmlock_user_lock spinlock into per user_struct spinlock From: rajman mekaco Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: To: Rik van Riel Cc: Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Paul Gortmaker , Andrew Morton , KOSAKI Motohiro , Minchan Kim , Christoph Lameter , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org > If 2 different user-mode processes executing on 2 CPUs under 2 different > users want to access the same shared memory through the One correction: This will happen even for different shared memory as the lock is global. This fact just increases the relevance of this patch, dont you think ? > shmctl(SHM_LOCK) / shmget(SHM_HUGETLB) / usr_shm_lock > primitives, they could compete/spin even though their user_structs > are different. > -- 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/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: email@kvack.org