On Tue, 2015-01-27 at 18:10 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > This is the thing I suggested > lkml.kernel.org/r/20150108103708.ge29...@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net > there right?
Yeah. > Do you have numbers for how much this gained? This is more of a correctness patch, nothing really tangible for performance -- although I did note a 5% tp increase as that particular workload, as pounds on the osq so we have to wait for the node->next pointer. Otherwise, the window between when we set the lock is taken and owner is set is very small. 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/
