[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.20.1602171027310.14247@east.gentwo.org>
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 10:27:59 -0600 (CST)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To: Waiman Long <waiman.long@....com>
cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Jan Kara <jack@...e.com>,
Jeff Layton <jlayton@...chiereds.net>,
"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...ldses.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Dave Chinner <dchinner@...hat.com>,
Scott J Norton <scott.norton@...com>,
Douglas Hatch <doug.hatch@...com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] lib/percpu-list: Per-cpu list with associated
per-cpu locks
On Wed, 17 Feb 2016, Waiman Long wrote:
> I know we can use RCU for singly linked list, but I don't think we can use
> that for doubly linked list as there is no easy way to make atomic changes to
> both prev and next pointers simultaneously unless you are taking about 16b
> cmpxchg which is only supported in some architecture.
But its supported in the most important architecutes. You can fall back to
spinlocks on the ones that do not support it.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists