lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Apr]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] rw_semaphores, optimisations try #3

On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, David Howells wrote:
>
> Yes but the "struct rwsem_waiter" batch would have to be entirely deleted from
> the list before any of them are woken, otherwise the waking processes may
> destroy their "rwsem_waiter" blocks before they are dequeued (this destruction
> is not guarded by a spinlock).

Look again.

Yes, they may destroy the list, but nobody cares.

Why?

- nobody will look up the list because we do have the spinlock at this
point, so a destroyed list doesn't actually _matter_ to anybody

You were actually depending on this earlier, although maybe not on
purpose.

- list_remove_between() doesn't care about the integrity of the entries
it destroys. It only uses, and only changes, the entries that are still
on the list.

Subtlety is fine. It might warrant a comment, though.

Linus

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:27    [W:0.062 / U:0.200 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site