[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4A489002.1080106@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:57:22 +0300
From: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
CC: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mtosatti@...hat.com,
paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, markmc@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] kvm: remove in_range and switch to rwsem for iobus
On 06/29/2009 12:51 PM, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> We can convert it to rcu indepenently of other things protected by
>> slots_lock; no need to do everything at the same time.
>>
>
> Yes but once we merge locks, it will be harder to split them out.
> I know I can now do grep bus_lock and find all places affected,
> if I reuse slot_lock this information is lost. No?
>
That's true, but for seeing the overall picture, fewer locks are
better. I'm more concerned about those looking at all the code (me)
than those implementing locking improvements (you).
--
error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function
--
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