lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Dec]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC] Change locking in block_dev.c:do_open()
Ryan Cumming wrote:
> On December 12, 2001 16:39, David C. Hansen wrote:
> > We can add a semaphore which must be acquired before a module can be
> > unloaded, and hold it over the area where the module must not be
> > unloaded. We could replace the unload_lock spinlock with a semaphore,
> > which I'll call it unload_sem here. It would look something like this:
> Why not use a read-write semaphore? The sections that require the module to
> stay resident use a read lock, and module unloading aquires a write lock. In
> addition to containing the evil, evil BKL, you might actually get a tangiable
> scalability gain out of it.
Cool idea. I'll do that. Now that we have those locking primitives in
the kernel I wish that we used them more often.
--
David C. Hansen
dave@sr71.net
-
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: 2005-03-22 13:14    [W:0.050 / U:0.784 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site