On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 09:56:03AM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Le vendredi 04 juin 2010 à 16:43 +1000, Nick Piggin a écrit :
> > pièce jointe document texte brut (kernel-introduce-brlock.patch)
> > This patch introduces "local-global" locks (lglocks). These can be used to:
> >
> > - Provide fast exclusive access to per-CPU data, with exclusive access to
> > another CPU's data allowed but possibly subject to contention, and to provide
> > very slow exclusive access to all per-CPU data.
> > - Or to provide very fast and scalable read serialisation, and to provide
> > very slow exclusive serialisation of data (not necessarily per-CPU data).
> >
> > Brlocks are also implemented as a short-hand notation for the latter use
> > case.
> >
> > Thanks to Paul for local/global naming convention.
> >
> > Cc: linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Cc: linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Cc: Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Frank Mayhar <fmayhar@xxxxxxxxxx>,
> > Cc: John Stultz <johnstul@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Signed-off-by: Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > include/linux/lglock.h | 165 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > 1 file changed, 165 insertions(+)
> >
>
> IMHO some changes in Documentation/ would be needed
I wonder where, and what?
> > + void name##_global_lock(void) { \
> > + int i; \
> > + preempt_disable(); \
> > + rwlock_acquire(&name##_lock_dep_map, 0, 0, _RET_IP_); \
> > + for_each_online_cpu(i) { \
>
> for_each_possible_cpu()
Oh good spotting. brlock does not need this but lglock does if it
protects offline cpu data too. Maybe better to move file handles in
the event of hotplug.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
