On Wed, 2006-04-05 at 15:21 -0700, Joshua Hudson wrote:
> Since we are moving from semaphores to mutex, there should be a
> mutex_rw.
should there really? We discussed this briefly during the mutex work
the conclusion was that rw_sems
1) are rare (thankfully; they're highly expensive)
2) do not have mutex semantics
so... can you explain how your rw_mutex is behaving different from an
rw_sem, and can you explain what the gains are for that conversion?
(eg for mutex it was better defined semantics, lots better debugging
(possible due to the semantics) and more performance). What is that for
rw_mutex ?
-
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]
