[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1291416070.2032.92.camel@laptop>
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2010 23:41:10 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Michel Lespinasse <walken@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-mm@...ck.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Hugh Dickins <hughd@...gle.com>,
Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...nel.dk>,
KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] x86 rwsem: more precise rwsem_is_contended()
implementation
On Thu, 2010-12-02 at 16:16 -0800, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
> We would like rwsem_is_contended() to return true only once a contending
> writer has had a chance to insert itself onto the rwsem wait queue.
> To that end, we need to differenciate between active and queued writers.
So you're only considering writer-writer contention? Not writer-reader
and reader-writer contention?
I'd argue rwsem_is_contended() should return true if there is _any_
blocked task, be it a read or a writer.
If you want something else call it something else, like
rwsem_is_write_contended() (there's a pending writer), or
rwsem_is_read_contended() (there's a pending reader).
--
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