[lkml]   [2005]   [Nov]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH RFC] big reader semaphore take#2
Tejun Heo wrote:
> Nick Piggin wrote:

>> The upshot of that would be that you could build the whole thing
>> from rwsem infrastructure and have basically zero other locking
>> mechanisms or complexity that you don't want in a synchronisation
>> primitive.
> To certain extent, I do agree with you - it's safer/simpler..., but on
> the other hand, new brsem isn't that more complex and would perform
> almost identically without extra semantical baggage. So, I thought it
> might be worth a bit more effort.

I would do it thisway if possible, yes.

> Hmm... So, array of rwsem's, it should be.

First implementation would be per-cpu just rwsems. A second patch
to make it just an array rwsem->count's plus a shared queue may
be in order - OTOH everyone does their own rwsems, so this will be
a bit of a headache.

I forget - are you just planning to use one global brsem? In this
case the size issue wouldn't be a pressing one.

SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.

Send instant messages to your online friends

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: 2005-11-05 02:29    [W:0.044 / U:1.464 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site