Re: [PATCH 2/2] mm: change mmap_sem over to the scalable rw_mutex

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

 



On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 11:08:24AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Fri, 11 May 2007 19:12:16 +0200
> Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > (now with reply-all)
> > 
> > On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 09:17 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Fri, 11 May 2007 15:15:43 +0200 Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > -	down_write(&current->mm->mmap_sem);
> > > > +	rw_mutex_write_lock(&current->mm->mmap_lock);
> > > 
> > > y'know, this is such an important lock and people have had such problems
> > > with it and so many different schemes and ideas have popped up that I'm
> > > kinda thinking that we should wrap it:
> > > 
> > > 	write_lock_mm(struct mm_struct *mm);
> > > 	write_unlock_mm(struct mm_struct *mm);
> > > 	read_lock_mm(struct mm_struct *mm);
> > > 	read_unlock_mm(struct mm_struct *mm);
> > > 
> > > so that further experimentations become easier?
> > 
> > Sure, can do; it'd require a few more functions than these, but its not
> > too many. However, what is the best way to go about such massive rename
> > actions? Just push them through quickly, and make everybody cope?
> 
> Well, if we _do_ decide to do this (is anyone howling?) then we can do
> 
> static inline void write_lock_mm(struct mm_struct *mm)
> {
> 	down_write(&mm->mmap_sem);
> }

I think that would be fine to do.
-
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]
  Powered by Linux