[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <25280.1273667611@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 12 May 2010 13:33:31 +0100
From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
To: Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>
Cc: dhowells@...hat.com,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Mike Waychison <mikew@...gle.com>,
Suleiman Souhlal <suleiman@...gle.com>,
Ying Han <yinghan@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/12] rwsem: wake queued readers when writer blocks on active read lock
Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com> wrote:
> + /* if there are no active locks, wake the front queued process(es) up.
> + *
> + * or if we're called from a failed down_write(), and there were
> + * already threads queued before us, and there are no active writers,
> + * the lock must be read owned; try to wake any read locks that were
> + * queued ahead of us. */
That looks weird. Can I suggest rewriting it thus:
/* If there are no active locks, wake the front queued process(es) up.
*
* Alternatively, if we're called from a failed down_write(), there
* were already threads queued before us and there are no active
* writers, the lock must be read owned; so we try to wake any read
* locks that were queued ahead of us. */
David
--
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