[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=HAQEqqswmueJHoc5ez3Bq1_3X2xZkO9sg8gzZ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2010 17:58:19 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>
Cc: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, hch@...radead.org, zohar@...ibm.com,
warthog9@...nel.org, jmorris@...ei.org, kyle@...artin.ca,
hpa@...or.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mingo@...e.hu,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] IMA: use rbtree instead of radix tree for inode
information cache
On Wed, Oct 20, 2010 at 3:47 PM, Trond Myklebust
<Trond.Myklebust@...app.com> wrote:
>
> That is a really interesting alternative to traditional locking. Could
> we perhaps document it in Documentation/rbtree.txt?
Well, I'd actually suggest avoiding it unless you feel that you
_really_ need it. So I wouldn't want to really suggest it as a generic
locking model - you had better have looked at pretty much all other
alternatives first. And if that seqlock starts failing a lot under
load, it ends up being _more_ expensive than just taking the lock in
the first place.
Linus
--
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