Nick Piggin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Peter Keilty is running into some scalability problems with buffer > head based IO. There are a couple of global spinlocks in the buffer > completion path, and they're showing up on 16-way IA64 systems.
Well in -mm these spinlocks are hashed and the performance is good. But it's a bit dorky. So we don't _have_ to go with the bit_spin_lock() approach. But bit_spin_lock() is nicer. The reason why I went with a hashed lock is that I have memories of being beaten up over suckiness of bit_spin_lock(). But I'm now wondering who was beating me up, and why ;)
