1. 15 5月, 2008 1 次提交
  2. 12 5月, 2008 1 次提交
    • L
      Add new 'cond_resched_bkl()' helper function · c3921ab7
      Linus Torvalds 提交于
      It acts exactly like a regular 'cond_resched()', but will not get
      optimized away when CONFIG_PREEMPT is set.
      
      Normal kernel code is already preemptable in the presense of
      CONFIG_PREEMPT, so cond_resched() is optimized away (see commit
      02b67cc3 "sched: do not do
      cond_resched() when CONFIG_PREEMPT").
      
      But when wanting to conditionally reschedule while holding a lock, you
      need to use "cond_sched_lock(lock)", and the new function is the BKL
      equivalent of that.
      
      Also make fs/locks.c use it.
      Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      c3921ab7
  3. 11 5月, 2008 1 次提交
    • L
      BKL: revert back to the old spinlock implementation · 8e3e076c
      Linus Torvalds 提交于
      The generic semaphore rewrite had a huge performance regression on AIM7
      (and potentially other BKL-heavy benchmarks) because the generic
      semaphores had been rewritten to be simple to understand and fair.  The
      latter, in particular, turns a semaphore-based BKL implementation into a
      mess of scheduling.
      
      The attempt to fix the performance regression failed miserably (see the
      previous commit 00b41ec2 'Revert
      "semaphore: fix"'), and so for now the simple and sane approach is to
      instead just go back to the old spinlock-based BKL implementation that
      never had any issues like this.
      
      This patch also has the advantage of being reported to fix the
      regression completely according to Yanmin Zhang, unlike the semaphore
      hack which still left a couple percentage point regression.
      
      As a spinlock, the BKL obviously has the potential to be a latency
      issue, but it's not really any different from any other spinlock in that
      respect.  We do want to get rid of the BKL asap, but that has been the
      plan for several years.
      
      These days, the biggest users are in the tty layer (open/release in
      particular) and Alan holds out some hope:
      
        "tty release is probably a few months away from getting cured - I'm
         afraid it will almost certainly be the very last user of the BKL in
         tty to get fixed as it depends on everything else being sanely locked."
      
      so while we're not there yet, we do have a plan of action.
      Tested-by: NYanmin Zhang <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com>
      Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
      Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
      Cc: Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>
      Cc: Alexander Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk>
      Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
      Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      8e3e076c
  4. 06 5月, 2008 10 次提交
  5. 01 5月, 2008 1 次提交
    • R
      rename div64_64 to div64_u64 · 6f6d6a1a
      Roman Zippel 提交于
      Rename div64_64 to div64_u64 to make it consistent with the other divide
      functions, so it clearly includes the type of the divide.  Move its definition
      to math64.h as currently no architecture overrides the generic implementation.
       They can still override it of course, but the duplicated declarations are
      avoided.
      Signed-off-by: NRoman Zippel <zippel@linux-m68k.org>
      Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@qumranet.com>
      Cc: Russell King <rmk@arm.linux.org.uk>
      Cc: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@linux-m68k.org>
      Cc: Ralf Baechle <ralf@linux-mips.org>
      Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
      Cc: Jeff Dike <jdike@addtoit.com>
      Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
      Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
      Cc: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
      Signed-off-by: NAndrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
      Signed-off-by: NLinus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
      6f6d6a1a
  6. 29 4月, 2008 2 次提交
  7. 25 4月, 2008 4 次提交
  8. 23 4月, 2008 1 次提交
  9. 20 4月, 2008 19 次提交