Re: scalability of signal delivery for Posix Threads

From: Matthew Wilcox <>
Date: 2004-11-23 03:07:05
On Mon, Nov 22, 2004 at 09:51:15AM -0600, Ray Bryant wrote:
> Since signals are sent much more often than sigaction() is called, it would
> seem to make more sense to make sigaction() take a heavier weight lock of
> some kind (to update the signal handler decription) and to have the signal
> delivery mechanism take a lighter weight lock.  Making 
> current->sighand->siglock a rwlock_t really doesn't improve the situation
> much, since cache line contention is just a severe in that case (if not 
> worse) than it is with the current definition.

What about RCU or seqlock?

"Next the statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting the blame upon 
the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those
conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse
to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince 
himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep 
he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception." -- Mark Twain
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Received on Mon Nov 22 11:10:45 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-02 09:20:32 EST