* Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2007 at 12:51:21PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > This barrier thing is constructed so that it will not write in the
> > sync() condition (the hot path) when there are no active lock
> > sections; thus avoiding cacheline bouncing. -- I'm just not sure how
> > this will work out in relation to PI. We might track those in the
> > barrier scope and boost those by the max prio of the blockers.
>
> Is this really needed? We seem to grow new funky locking algorithms
> exponentially, while people already have a hard time understanding the
> existing ones.
yes, it's needed.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
