Re: Async resume patch (was: Re: [GIT PULL] PM updates for 2.6.33)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On Tue, 8 Dec 2009, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> 
> The wait queue plus the op_complete flag combo plays the role of the locking
> in the Linus' picture

Please just use the lock. Don't make up your own locking crap. Really. 

Your patch is horrible. Exactly because your locking is horribly 
mis-designed. You can't say things are complete from an interrupt, for 
example, since you made it some random bitfield, which has unknown 
characteristics (ie non-atomic read-modify-write etc).

The fact is, any time anybody makes up a new locking mechanism, THEY 
ALWAYS GET IT WRONG. Don't do it.

I suggested using the rwsem locking for a good reason. It made sense. It 
was simpler. Just do it that way, stop making up crap.

		Linus
_______________________________________________
linux-pm mailing list
linux-pm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-pm

[Index of Archives]     [Linux ACPI]     [Netdev]     [Ethernet Bridging]     [Linux Wireless]     [CPU Freq]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Security]     [Linux for Hams]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux Admin]     [Samba]

  Powered by Linux