Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 2 Oct 2005 10:47:18 +0930
From:      Greg 'groggy' Lehey <grog@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
Cc:        Ansar Mohammed <ansarm@gmail.com>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   "BGL", Giant and kernel lockups
Message-ID:  <20051002011718.GE95042@wantadilla.lemis.com>
In-Reply-To: <20051001081124.GA63863@xor.obsecurity.org>
References:  <20050930204601.GA31598@xor.obsecurity.org> <000901c5c63c$5c2fa190$0b02a8c0@northamerica.corp.microsoft.com> <20051001081124.GA63863@xor.obsecurity.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

--orO6xySwJI16pVnm
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

On Saturday,  1 October 2005 at  4:11:25 -0400, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 11:58:14PM -0400, Ansar Mohammed wrote:
>> I love FreeBSD. I have been using it since 2.x. I have never had any
>> problems with it. Rock Solid. Never a single kernel panic.
>>
>> Then I come across this article in a comparison between Linux and
>> FreeBSD saying that FreeBSD has kernel locking
>> issues. Specifically, a problem nicknamed BGL or Big Giant Lock. It
>> seems that it affects SMP systems under high load.
>
> Sounds like a pretty simplistic summary, but as I mentioned it's out
> of date anyway.

I don't think that answers his question.

I think that most people (with the exception of Erik Trulsson) have
missed the fact that Ansar has a misconception about the meaning of
"BGL".  This is not a "problem", and it has nothing to do with kernel
stability (lockups); it has to do with the way the kernel protects its
data integrity in normal operation.

All kernels perform locking for this purpose.  Older UNIX (including
BSD) and Linux systems used a thing called the "Big Kernel Lock" or
Giant to ensure that only one process, system wide, had access to the
entire kernel at a time.  This was a performance issue, not a
stability issue.  All modern systems have relaxed this requirement.

You may like to look at my (now somewhat out of date) papers on
FreeBSD SMPNg, available at http://www.lemis.com/grog/Papers/.  There
should be more up-to-date information on the current state of the
FreeBSD implementation.

Greg
--
When replying to this message, please copy the original recipients.
If you don't, I may ignore the reply or reply to the original recipients.
For more information, see http://www.lemis.com/questions.html
See complete headers for address and phone numbers.

--orO6xySwJI16pVnm
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFDPzUeIubykFB6QiMRAlsKAJ9ugrzC7Jyuqxx+3HnAS8ZMXyCTxwCfbk7+
aXCEnmUm+T6zr64BzL5bvzQ=
=O0S1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--orO6xySwJI16pVnm--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20051002011718.GE95042>