[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0805091059050.19252@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
Date: Fri, 9 May 2008 11:00:22 -0700 (PDT)
From: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
cc: Olaf Weber <olaf@....com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, npiggin@...e.de
Subject: Re: Spinlocks waiting with interrupts disabled / preempt disabled.
On Fri, 9 May 2008, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > A third solution would be to look at this problem on a case-by-case
> > basis. In the case under discussion, there may be other kernel bugs
> > that aggravate the problem (it is an old kernel after all) and maybe
> > this just means the address_space.tree_lock ought to be replaced with
> > something else (though I wouldn't claim to know what).
>
> That has been done by Nick Piggin, the lockless pagecache work removes
> the read side of the tree_lock.
When is that going to get merged? find_get_page is still:
struct page * find_get_page(struct address_space *mapping, pgoff_t offset)
{
struct page *page;
read_lock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock);
page = radix_tree_lookup(&mapping->page_tree, offset);
if (page)
page_cache_get(page);
read_unlock_irq(&mapping->tree_lock);
return page;
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL(find_get_page);
--
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