On Wed, 11 Jun 2014 13:34:04 +0900 Joonsoo Kim wrote:
> > While rcu list traversal over the vmap_area_list is safe, this may
> > arrive at different results than the spinlocked version. The rcu list
> > traversal version will not be a 'snapshot' of a single, valid instant
> > of the entire vmap_a
On Tue, 2014-06-10 at 23:32 -0400, Peter Hurley wrote:
> While rcu list traversal over the vmap_area_list is safe, this may
> arrive at different results than the spinlocked version. The rcu list
> traversal version will not be a 'snapshot' of a single, valid instant
> of the entire vmap_area_list
g, Richard Yao , Eric
> Dumazet
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] vmalloc: use rcu list iterator to reduce
> vmap_area_lock
> contention
> References: <1402453146-10057-1-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo@lge.com>
> In-Reply-To: <1402453146-10057-1-git-send-email-iamjoonsoo@lge.co
On 06/10/2014 10:19 PM, Joonsoo Kim wrote:
Richard Yao reported a month ago that his system have a trouble
with vmap_area_lock contention during performance analysis
by /proc/meminfo. Andrew asked why his analysis checks /proc/meminfo
stressfully, but he didn't answer it.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2
Richard Yao reported a month ago that his system have a trouble
with vmap_area_lock contention during performance analysis
by /proc/meminfo. Andrew asked why his analysis checks /proc/meminfo
stressfully, but he didn't answer it.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2014/4/10/416
Although I'm not sure that this
5 matches
Mail list logo
