Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 17 May 2010 16:13:31 -0700 | From | Michel Lespinasse <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 07/10] generic rwsem: implement down_read_critical() / up_read_critical() |
| |
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 03:44:24PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > You didn't update the comment for the new name here... > > > - when the rwsem is write owned, down_read_unfair() callers get queued in > > front of threads trying to acquire the rwsem by other means. > > .. or here. In this case, it really is more about "unfairness", but I'm > not convinced it should be so in the naming anyway, even if internally it > might be __down_read_unfair. "critical" I think covers both.
Gah! Sorry for missing the comment updates. I agree with you on the naming, I just didn't remember about the comment.
Will send identical patch with the correct comment as reply to this.
> Anyway, the series looks mostly acceptable to me in this form. I think it > conceptually works out, and I think that the non-preemption guarantee > should mean that starvation of writers is not likely an issue. However, > I'd definitely like some second opinions on it. I'm not going to apply > this series without acks from people. So you should try to convince DavidH > too that this actually really does matter and makes sense.
I'll see what I can do here. Thanks !
-- Michel "Walken" Lespinasse A program is never fully debugged until the last user dies.
| |