Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 11 May 2007 11:08:24 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: change mmap_sem over to the scalable rw_mutex |
| |
On Fri, 11 May 2007 19:12:16 +0200 Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> wrote:
> (now with reply-all) > > On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 09:17 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On Fri, 11 May 2007 15:15:43 +0200 Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> wrote: > > > > > - down_write(¤t->mm->mmap_sem); > > > + rw_mutex_write_lock(¤t->mm->mmap_lock); > > > > y'know, this is such an important lock and people have had such problems > > with it and so many different schemes and ideas have popped up that I'm > > kinda thinking that we should wrap it: > > > > write_lock_mm(struct mm_struct *mm); > > write_unlock_mm(struct mm_struct *mm); > > read_lock_mm(struct mm_struct *mm); > > read_unlock_mm(struct mm_struct *mm); > > > > so that further experimentations become easier? > > Sure, can do; it'd require a few more functions than these, but its not > too many. However, what is the best way to go about such massive rename > actions? Just push them through quickly, and make everybody cope?
Well, if we _do_ decide to do this (is anyone howling?) then we can do
static inline void write_lock_mm(struct mm_struct *mm) { down_write(&mm->mmap_sem); }
and then let the conversions trickle into the tree in an orderly fashion.
Once we think all the conversions have landed, we rename mmap_sem to _mmap_sem to avoid any backpedalling.
- 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/
| |