Re: [PATCH] rwsem: reduce spinlock contention in wakeup code path

[Ingo Molnar]

* Michel Lespinasse <walken@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> That said, I am very scared of using rwlock_t here, and I would much 
> prefer we choose a fair lock (either spinlock or a new rwlock 
> implementation which guarantees not to starve any locker thread)

Given how few users rwlock_t has today we could attempt to make it 
reader-writer fair, as long as the usecase of a hardirq or softirq
context always getting nested read access on the same CPU is preserved. 

(but that can be done - if nothing else then with an explicit context 
check.)

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/