Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 7 Mar 2002 10:42:41 -0500 | From | Arjan van de Ven <> | Subject | Re: furwocks: Fast Userspace Read/Write Locks |
| |
On Thu, Mar 07, 2002 at 10:33:32AM -0500, Hubertus Franke wrote: > On Thursday 07 March 2002 07:50 am, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > > Rusty Russell wrote: > > > This is a userspace implementation of rwlocks on top of futexes. > > > > question: if rwlocks aren't actually slower in the fast path than > > futexes, > > would it make sense to only do the rw variant and in some userspace > > layer > > map "traditional" semaphores to write locks ? > > Saves half the implementation and testing.... > > - > > 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/ > > I m not in favor of that. The dominant lock will be mutexes.
if there's no extra cost I don't care which is dominant; having one well tested path is worth it then. If there is extra cost then yes a split is better. - 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/
| |