On Wed, 2009-01-14 at 19:33 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Full series, including changelogs available at: > > > > http://programming.kicks-ass.net/kernel-patches/mutex-adaptive-spin/ > > > > and should shortly appear in a git tree near Ingo :-) > > Linus, > > Please pull the adaptive-mutexes-for-linus git tree from: > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/linux-2.6-tip.git adaptive-mutexes-for-linus > I was going to put this into the btrfs tree, but since you have a branch just for adaptive mutexes, is it easier to put there? From: Chris Mason <chris.mason@xxxxxxxxxx> Btrfs: stop spinning on mutex_trylock and let the adaptive code spin for us Mutexes now spin internally and the btrfs spin is no longer required for performance. Signed-off-by: Chris Mason <chris.mason@xxxxxxxxxx> diff --git a/fs/btrfs/locking.c b/fs/btrfs/locking.c index 39bae77..40ba8e8 100644 --- a/fs/btrfs/locking.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/locking.c @@ -37,16 +37,6 @@ int btrfs_tree_lock(struct extent_buffer *eb) { - int i; - - if (mutex_trylock(&eb->mutex)) - return 0; - for (i = 0; i < 512; i++) { - cpu_relax(); - if (mutex_trylock(&eb->mutex)) - return 0; - } - cpu_relax(); mutex_lock_nested(&eb->mutex, BTRFS_MAX_LEVEL - btrfs_header_level(eb)); return 0; } -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
