[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1153643380.7359.24.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org>
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2006 10:29:40 +0200
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
To: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, ashok.raj@...el.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, davej@...hat.com,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>
Subject: Re: remove cpu hotplug bustification in cpufreq.
Hi,
> > Well, I just got Ashok's trial patches which turns the thing into a rwsem
> > as I outlined earlier.
>
> Mark my words ;)
>
> > I'll try them out. If they don't work, we should just delete the lock and
> > go totally back to square 1.
>
> rwsem conversion has the potential to merely hide the problem. Ingo, does
> lockdep detect recursive down_read()?
lockdep detects and warns about those.
I think we're about equally skeptical about this; I'm extremely hesitant
about any place in the kernel that uses rwsems for anything other than a
performance tweak. I've ended up with a mental model of rwsems that
basically comes down to "you need to be able to replace it with a mutex
without breaking correctness". Now of course that model is somewhat of
an oversimplification, but not by that much...
Greetings,
Arjan van de Ven
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists