RE: [linuxppc-release] [PATCH v2 4/4] fsl-dma: use spin_lock_bh to instead of spin_lock_irqsave

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tabi Timur-B04825
> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2012 11:01 PM
> To: Liu Qiang-B32616
> Cc: linux-crypto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linuxppc-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Vinod
> Koul; herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Dan Williams; Li Yang-R58472;
> davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [linuxppc-release] [PATCH v2 4/4] fsl-dma: use spin_lock_bh
> to instead of spin_lock_irqsave
> 
> Qiang Liu wrote:
> > Use spin_lock_bh to instead of spin_lock_irqsave for improving
> performance.
> 
> Please provide some evidence that performance has improved, as well as an
> explanation why it's okay to use spin_lock_bh, and why it's faster.
I compared my test result before and after this patch, write performance can
improved by 15%. I will send the latest patches sooner because of Ira's concern.
I will give a complete description about the improvement of spin_lock_bh().

About your question, spin_lock_bh is used in the case of bottom/half as its
name, there is no need to protect a running/pending list with spin_lock_irqsave.

Thanks.

> --
> Timur Tabi
> Linux kernel developer at Freescale

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Kernel]     [Gnu Classpath]     [Gnu Crypto]     [DM Crypt]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]

  Powered by Linux