lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Mar]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: 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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:24    [W:0.022 / U:90.152 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site