From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S932518AbcKGQG6 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 7 Nov 2016 11:06:58 -0500
Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([193.170.194.197]:56601 "EHLO
        one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S932327AbcKGQG4 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 7 Nov 2016 11:06:56 -0500
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2016 08:06:53 -0800
From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: Vitaly Wool <vitalywool@gmail.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>, Linux-MM <linux-mm@kvack.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Dan Streetman <ddstreet@ieee.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] z3fold: use per-page read/write lock
Message-ID: <20161107160652.GJ26852@two.firstfloor.org>
References: <20161105144946.3b4be0ee799ae61a82e1d918@gmail.com>
 <87lgwxo5u9.fsf@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
 <CAMJBoFNWV92c5B3HLJ=6wgNNUJFpTUgu3qf1mWgYxTEhfaA_LA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAMJBoFNWV92c5B3HLJ=6wgNNUJFpTUgu3qf1mWgYxTEhfaA_LA@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

> I understand the reinvention part but you're not quite accurate here
> with the numbers.
> 
> E. g. on x86_64:
> (gdb) p sizeof(rwlock_t)
> $1 = 8

I was talking about spinlocks which are 4 bytes.  Just use a spinlock then. 
rwlocks are usually a bad idea anyways because they often scale far worse than
spinlocks due to the bad cache line bouncing behavior, and it doesn't
make much difference unless your critical section is very long.

-Andi