[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1399343437.2498.3.camel@buesod1.americas.hpqcorp.net>
Date: Mon, 05 May 2014 19:30:37 -0700
From: Davidlohr Bueso <davidlohr@...com>
To: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
peterz@...radead.org, peter@...leysoftware.com, jason.low2@...com,
riel@...hat.com, alex.shi@...aro.org, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, tglx@...utronix.de, walken@...gle.com,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>
Subject: Re: [tip:locking/core] rwsem: Add comments to explain the meaning
of the rwsem's count field
On Mon, 2014-05-05 at 15:51 -0700, Tim Chen wrote:
> On Mon, 2014-05-05 at 20:27 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > > Ingo,
> > >
> > > The delta patch is included below. Thinking a bit more,
> > > the state diagram approach is not necessarily less verbose
> > > because the state is a tuple (count, wait queue state).
> > > After enumerating the states, we may wind up with very similar
> > > to what I have.
> >
> > Could we at least try with one diagram and see how it goes?
> >
>
> I've tried (see below). But I don't like how it came out :(
And quite nice, thanks for doing this. Personally, however, I much
prefer the already applied patch to this approach.
Thanks,
Davidlohr
--
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