On Wed, 2013-03-20 at 13:49 -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 12:55 PM, Rik van Riel <r...@surriel.com> wrote: > > > > This series makes the sysv semaphore code more scalable, > > by reducing the time the semaphore lock is held, and making > > the locking more scalable for semaphore arrays with multiple > > semaphores. > > The series looks sane to me, and I like how each individual step is > pretty small and makes sense. > > It *would* be lovely to see this run with the actual Swingbench > numbers. The microbenchmark always looked much nicer. Do the > additional multi-semaphore scalability patches on top of Davidlohr's > patches help with the swingbench issue, or are we still totally > swamped by the ipc lock there?
Yes, I'm testing this patchset with my swingbench workloads. I should have some numbers by today or tomorrow. > > Maybe there were already numbers for that, but the last swingbench > numbers I can actually recall was from before the finer-grained > locking.. Right, I couldn't get Oracle to run on the with the previous patches, hopefully the bug(s) are now addressed. Thanks, Davidlohr -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
