[lkml]   [2003]   [Apr]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRE: [patch] printk subsystems

    Perez-Gonzalez, Inaky writes:
    > >
    > > relayfs is there to solve the data transfer problems for the most
    > > demanding of applications. Sending a few messages here and there
    > > isn't really a problem. Sending messages/events/what-you-want-to-call-it
    > > by the thousand every second, while using as little locking as possible
    > > (lockless-logging is implemented in the case of relayfs' buffer handling
    > > routines), and providing per-cpu buffering requires a different beast.
    > Well, you are doing an IRQ lock (relay_lock_channel()), so it is not
    > lockless. Or am I missing anything here? Please let me know, I am
    > really interested on how to reduce locking in for logging to the
    > minimal.

    relayfs actually uses 2 mutually-exclusive schemes internally -
    'lockless' and 'locking', depending on the availability of a cmpxchg
    instruction (lockless needs cmpxchg). If the lockless scheme is being
    used, relay_lock_channel() does no locking or irq disabling of any
    kind i.e. it's basically a no-op in that case. It's only when the
    'locking' scheme is in use that relay_lock_channel() does locking/irq
    disabling. Normally the lockless scheme would be in use - the locking
    scheme is there mainly as a fallback, so normally relay_lock_channel()
    would indeed cause no locking.


    Tom Zanussi <>
    IBM Linux Technology Center/RAS

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:34    [W:0.019 / U:2.588 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site