diff options
author | Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com> | 2005-09-03 15:54:41 -0700 |
---|---|---|
committer | Linus Torvalds <torvalds@evo.osdl.org> | 2005-09-05 00:05:42 -0700 |
commit | 5d337b9194b1ce3b6fd5f3cb2799455ed2f9a3d1 (patch) | |
tree | 91ed9ef6f4cb5f6a1832f2baaaabd53fcd83513e /MAINTAINERS | |
parent | 048c27fd72816b44e096997d1c6901c3abbfd45b (diff) |
[PATCH] swap: swap_lock replace list+device
The idea of a swap_device_lock per device, and a swap_list_lock over them all,
is appealing; but in practice almost every holder of swap_device_lock must
already hold swap_list_lock, which defeats the purpose of the split.
The only exceptions have been swap_duplicate, valid_swaphandles and an
untrodden path in try_to_unuse (plus a few places added in this series).
valid_swaphandles doesn't show up high in profiles, but swap_duplicate does
demand attention. However, with the hold time in get_swap_pages so much
reduced, I've not yet found a load and set of swap device priorities to show
even swap_duplicate benefitting from the split. Certainly the split is mere
overhead in the common case of a single swap device.
So, replace swap_list_lock and swap_device_lock by spinlock_t swap_lock
(generally we seem to prefer an _ in the name, and not hide in a macro).
If someone can show a regression in swap_duplicate, then probably we should
add a hashlock for the swap_map entries alone (shorts being anatomic), so as
to help the case of the single swap device too.
Signed-off-by: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>
Signed-off-by: Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Diffstat (limited to 'MAINTAINERS')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions