> The file locking code isn't performance critical. But yes, the code only
> sleeps in very specific places, which are while the semaphore either
> isn't held, or is dropped while we sleep, and the code then restarts
> its scan if we did have to block.
>
> > I've always replaced lock_kernel() with one spinlock.
>
> or, presumably, a lot of spinlocks -- I did think about making the
The 2.3.9x file locking code is fairly broken anyway. Actually going over
it with a large pickaxe wouldnt do any harm. Putting in resource limits
and fixing the N^2 and worse algorithms would also help no end.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 21 2000 - 18:45:36 EDT