On Fri, 19 Jun 2009, Gregory Haskins wrote: > I am fairly confident it is not that simple after having thought about > this issue over the last few days. But I've been wrong in the past. > Propose a patch and I will review it for races/correctness, if you > like. Perhaps a combination of that plus your asymmetrical locking > scheme would work. One of the challenges you will hit is avoiding ABBA > between your "get" lock and the wqh, but good luck! A patch for what? The eventfd patch is a one-liner. It seems hard to believe that the thing cannot be handled on your side. Once the wake_up_locked() is turned into a wake_up(), what other races are there? Let's not try to find the problem that fits and justify the "cool" solution, but let's see if a problem is there at all. - Davide -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
