Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Sat, 05 Nov 2005 12:29:31 +1100 | | From | Nick Piggin <> | | Subject | Re: [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 http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
- 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/
|  |