[lkml]   [2010]   [Oct]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Inode Lock Scalability V7 (was V6)
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 01:41:52PM +1100, Nick Piggin wrote:
> The locking in my lock break patch is ugly and wrong, yes. But it is
> always an intermediate step. I want to argue that with RCU inode work
> *anyway*, there is not much point to reducing the strength of the
> i_lock property because locking can be cleaned up nicely and still
> keep i_lock ~= inode_lock (for a single inode).

The other thing is that with RCU, the idea of locking an object in
the data structure with a per object lock actually *is* much more
natural. It's hard to do it properly with just a big data structure

If I want to take a reference to an inode from a data structre, how
to do it with RCU?

list_for_each(inode) {
spin_lock(&big_lock); /* oops, might as well not even use RCU then */
if (!unhashed) {

 \ /
  Last update: 2010-10-22 04:51    [W:0.046 / U:3.648 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site