Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] locking/mutex: Rewrite basic mutex

From	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Newsgroups	linux.kernel
Subject	Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] locking/mutex: Rewrite basic mutex
Date	2016-08-27 20:30 +0200
Message-ID	<saQwF-7Xx-3@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink)
References	(2 earlier) <s9mU1-6sX-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <s9vaV-3B2-1@gated-at.bofh.it> <sa54K-2ST-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <sa5R7-3r1-5@gated-at.bofh.it> <sa5R7-3r1-3@gated-at.bofh.it>
Organization	linux.* mail to news gateway

Show all headers | View raw

* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:

> Its because the mutex wasn't quite exclusive enough :-) If you let in multiple 
> owner, like with that race you found, you get big gains in throughput ...

Btw., do we know which mutex that was?

That it didn't crash with a full AIM run suggests that whatever it is protecting 
it could probably be parallelized some more while still having a mostly working 
kernel! ;-)

Thanks,

	Ingo

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] locking/mutex: Rewrite basic mutex Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-08-25 18:40 +0200
  Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/3] locking/mutex: Rewrite basic mutex Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2016-08-27 20:30 +0200

csiph-web