Re: [PATCH v5 00/44] ldisc patchset

[Peter Hurley]

On Wed, 2013-03-13 at 04:36 -0700, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> Have you considered building your ldlock based on lib/rwsem-spinlock.c
> instead ? i.e. having an internal spinlock to protect the ldisc
> reference count and the reader and writer queues. This would seem much
> simpler get right. The downside would be that a spinlock would be
> taken for a short time whenever an ldisc reference is taken or
> released. I don't expect that the internal spinlock would get
> significant contention ?

That would have been too easy :)

TBH, I hadn't considered it until I was most the way through a working
atomic version. I had already split the reader/writer wait lists. And
figured out how to always use the wait bias for every waiting reader and
writer -- rather than the rwsem way of testing for an empty list --
which made the timeout handling easier.

At the time, the only thing that I was still struggling with was
recursion, and the spinlock flavor wasn't going to fix that. So I just
kept with the atomic flavor.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/