* Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 09:46:00AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 4:28 AM, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Something like so? Compiles and runs the benchmark in question. > > > > Oh, and can you do this with a commit log and sign-off, and I'll put > > it in my "anon_vma-locking" branch that I have. I'm not going to > > actually merge that branch into mainline until I've seen a few more > > acks or more testing by Tim. > > > > But if Tim's numbers hold up (-32% to +15% performance by just the > > first one, and +15% isn't actually an improvement since tmpfs > > read-ahead should have gotten us to +66%), I think we have to do this > > just to avoid the performance regression. > > You could also add the mutex "optimize caching protocol" > patch I posted earlier to that branch. > > It didn't actually improve Tim's throughput number, but it made the > CPU consumption of the mutex go down. Why have you ignored the negative feedback for that patch: http://marc.info/?i=20110617190705.GA26824@xxxxxxx and why have you resent this patch without addressing that feedback? Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>