[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1249572286.32113.527.camel@twins>
Date: Thu, 06 Aug 2009 17:24:46 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Paul Menage <menage@...gle.com>, Benjamin Blum <bblum@...gle.com>,
containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, oleg <oleg@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] Makes procs file writable to move all threads by
tgid at once
On Thu, 2009-08-06 at 08:19 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > So yes, putting a rwsem in there sounds fine, you're already bouncing
> > it.
>
> If the critical section is small, is an rwsem really better than a
> straight mutex?
Well, my understanding was that it needed to surround much, if not all,
of clone(). That's a rather large bit of code.
--
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