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    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans