lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Aug]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateSat, 23 Aug 2008 11:02:19 -0700 (PDT)
FromLinus Torvalds <>
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH] Writer-biased low-latency rwlock v8

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> 
> Now, let me explain why I need at least not one, but _four different_
> contention bits. Simply because there are four types of contention, one
> for each execution context which may take the read lock. (irq, softirq,
> non-preemptable, preemptable)

No. You need _one_ contention bit in the fast-path.

Then, as you get into the slow-path, you can decide on four different 
behaviours.

Quite frankly, I don't think this discussion is going anywhere. I don't 
think I'd take anything from you, since you seem to have a really hard 
time separating out the issue of fast-path and slow-path. So I'm simply 
not going to bother, and I'm not going to expect to merge your work. 

Sorry, but it simply isn't worth my time or effort.

			Linus


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-08-23 20:05    [from the cache]
©2003-2008