Re: [patch 0/8] mutex subsystem, ANNOUNCE

> I'd probably just call "bastard": it is probably _unlucky_ when _doesn't_
> get to retake the lock, judging by the factor-of-4 speedup that Jes
> demonstrated.

I suspect that's more avoiding the double wakeup that semaphores have
(semaphores aren't quite fair either)

> 
> Which might be the right thing to do, but having the front waiter go to
> the back of the queue I think is not.

afaik that isn't happening though.


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

---

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: [patch 0/8] mutex subsystem, ANNOUNCE
    • From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [patch 0/8] mutex subsystem, ANNOUNCE
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 0/8] mutex subsystem, ANNOUNCE
    • From: Jes Sorensen <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 0/8] mutex subsystem, ANNOUNCE
    • From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 0/8] mutex subsystem, ANNOUNCE
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 0/8] mutex subsystem, ANNOUNCE
    • From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 0/8] mutex subsystem, ANNOUNCE
    • From: Arjan van de Ven <[email protected]>
  • Re: [patch 0/8] mutex subsystem, ANNOUNCE
    • From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: ETA for Areca RAID driver (arcmsr) in mainline?
• Next by Date: Re: usb: replace __setup("nousb") with __module_param_call
• Previous by thread: Re: [patch 0/8] mutex subsystem, ANNOUNCE
• Next by thread: Re: [patch 0/8] mutex subsystem, ANNOUNCE
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]