> Provide a simple fine grain locked double link list.
>
> It is build upon the regular double linked list primitives, spinlocks and RCU.
>
> Locking is peculiar in that edges are locked, this avoid the circular lock
> dependancy created by the fact that the regular linked lists are circular.
>
> Item deletion requires that both surrounding elements are locked, however since
> the locking rules dictate that we lock elements in a single direction we have
> to lock the previous element while it might be deleted under us. Hence the
> requirement that all elements are RCU freed.
I think implicitly locked data structures are very bad for code readability
and debugability. What's even worse here is that we have a requirement that
all members are RCU freed.
Note that we also have another implicitly locked (and refcounted) list
implementation in klist.[ch] - if we find consensus that we want implicitly
locked list we should figure out whether we want lock_list or klist semantics
and stick to one of them.
What uses do you have planned for this data structure? In general I think
we'd be better off to simplify the data structures as in my files_list_lock
proposal instead of complicating the locking.
-
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/
[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]
