On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> Not yet ;) Is there a way to hide the depth in the spinlock/mutex
> structure itself so that initialization code could do
> spin_lock_init_nested() and spare the rest of the code from that
> knowledge?
(shortened CC list a bit)
In fact I am not sure what you mean. On every lock and unlock operation,
in case of recursive locking (which our case is), you have to provide
class identifier, which is used to distinguish if the lock is of the same
instance, or a different one (deeper or higher in the locking hierarchy).
There is no way how spin_lock() or mutex_lock() can know this
"automatically", you always have to provide the nesting level from
outside, as it depends on the ordering hierarchy, which locking primitives
are totally unaware of.
Or did I misunderstand you?
Thanks,
--
JiKos.
-
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]
