On Sat, 23 Aug 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote: > > Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11410 > Subject : SLUB list_lock vs obj_hash.lock... > Submitter : Daniel J Blueman <daniel.blueman@xxxxxxxxx> > Date : 2008-08-22 21:48 (2 days old) > References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121944176609042&w=4 This one now has a suggested patch for Daniel to try from Vegard, but no reply yet: http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121946972307110&w=4 Vegard, I think your patch is a bit odd, though. The result of your patch is - first loop: hlist_for_each_entry_safe(obj, node, tmp, &db->list, node) { hlist_del(&obj->node); hlist_add_head(&obj->node, &freelist); } and quite frankly, I don't see what the difference between that and a something like a simple struct hlist_node *first = bd->list.first; if (first) { bd->list.first = NULL; first->pprev = &first; } really is? I dunno. We don't have list splicing ops for the hlist things. Linus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
