lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [May]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] Document futex PI design

    On Wed, 10 May 2006, Gleb Natapov wrote:

    > On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 06:59:49AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
    > > +lock - In this document from now on, the term lock and spin lock will
    > > + be synonymous. These are locks that are used for SMP as well
    > > + as turning off preemption to protect areas of code on SMP machines.
    > Should the last SMP be UP?
    >

    Grmb, I should fix that definition.

    No, it should still be SMP but the definition is awkward. I need to state
    that really, when I refer to "lock" I mean that I'm talking about raw spin
    locks. So it mainly protects SMP code, but also UP by disabling
    preemption. So I'm talking about a normal spin_lock.

    I wrote this document generically so that it works for both the vanilla
    kernel when talking about the PI of futexes, as well as when talking about
    the -rt patch with its kernel mutexes. In the -rt patch, spin locks turn
    into mutexes, so I was stumbling over not mentioning spin_locks per se,
    but was trying to explain them as just spinning locks.

    Anyway, I should rewrite that definition.

    Thanks for the feedback,

    -- Steve

    -
    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: 2006-05-10 15:12    [W:0.026 / U:62.152 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site