Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 07 Apr 2011 10:14:08 +0800 | From | Huang Ying <> | Subject | Re: About lock-less data structure patches |
| |
On 04/06/2011 09:48 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > * huang ying (huang.ying.caritas@gmail.com) wrote: [snip] >>>> >>>> OK. I will change the comments, adding these semantics explanation. >>>> The user should be warned :) >>> >>> Yes, that makes sense. After this generalization step, if you're ok with >>> this, we could aim at moving the implementation from a stack to a queue >>> and provide fifo semantic rather than lifo, so that other users (e.g. >>> call_rcu in the kernel) can start benefiting from it. >> >> I think that is good to move from stack to queue. >> >> I will send out changed lock-less data structure patchset soon. And >> we can continue to work on the new lock-less queue at the same time. > > Sounds like a very good plan! Thanks!
Maybe you can send out your lock-less queue patches, so we can work on that.
Best Regards, Huang Ying
| |