[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20171214130651.GB10791@lst.de>
Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2017 14:06:51 +0100
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] epoll: use the waitqueue lock to protect ep->wq
> Hm, that reads a bit weirdly. How about:
>
> The epoll code currently uses the unlocked waitqueue helpers for managing
> ep->wq, but instead of holding the waitqueue lock around these calls, it
> uses its own ep->lock spinlock.
Thanks, fixed.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists