Re: [patch 1/4] spinlock: lockbreak cleanup

On Thu, 2007-11-01 at 15:02 +0100, Nick Piggin wrote:

> Rename need_lockbreak to spin_needbreak, make it use spin_is_contended to
> decouple it from the spinlock implementation, and make it typesafe (rwlocks
> do not have any need_lockbreak sites -- why do they even get bloated up
> with that break_lock then?).

IIRC Lee has a few patches floating about that do introduce lockbreak
stuff for rwlocks.


-
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 1/4] spinlock: lockbreak cleanup
    • From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>

• References:
  • [patch 0/4] ticket spinlocks for x86
    • From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
  • [patch 1/4] spinlock: lockbreak cleanup
    • From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: [patch 4/4] x86: spinlock.h merge
• Next by Date: Re: pci-disable-decode-of-io-memory-during-bar-sizing.patch
• Previous by thread: [patch 1/4] spinlock: lockbreak cleanup
• Next by thread: Re: [patch 1/4] spinlock: lockbreak cleanup
• 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]