[lkml]   [2002]   [Oct]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH]IPC locks breaking down with RCU
On Tue, 22 Oct 2002, Dipankar Sarma wrote:
> I took a quick look at the original ipc code and I don't understand
> something - it seems to me the ipc_ids structs are protected by the semaphore
> inside for all operations, so why do we need the spinlock in the
> first place ? Am I missing something here ?

I made that mistake too at first, Mingming set me straight.
Many of the entry points down() the ipc_ids.sem semaphore, but the
most significant ones do not. ipc/sem.c is probably the best example
(if confusing, since it involves quite different meanings of semaphore):
sys_semop() is the frequent, fast entry point, uses sem_lock without down.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:30    [W:0.152 / U:1.400 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site