From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com>
Cc: rusty@rustcorp.com.au, torvalds@osdl.org, akpm@osdl.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, arjan@linux.intel.com,
davej@redhat.com, vatsa@in.ibm.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com,
ashok.raj@intel.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] Redesign cpu_hotplug locking.
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 13:24:22 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060824112422.GA21121@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20060824112749.GG2395@in.ibm.com>
* Gautham R Shenoy <ego@in.ibm.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 12:34:12PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > Please add the appropriate lock_acquire()/lock_release() calls into the
> > new sleeping semaphore type. Just use the parameters that rwlocks use:
> >
> > #define rwlock_acquire(l, s, t, i) lock_acquire(l, s, t, 0, 2, i)
> > #define rwlock_acquire_read(l, s, t, i) lock_acquire(l, s, t, 2, 2, i)
>
> > and lockdep will allow recursive read-locking. You'll also need a
> > lockdep_init_map() call to register the lock with lockdep. Then your
> > locking scheme will be fully checked by lockdep too. (with your current
> > code the new lock type is not added to the lock dependency graph(s))
>
> I'm on it. :)
you'll also need to add a dep_map to the cpu_hotplug structure itself.
and i think this extension of lockdep to the new lock type will be
invariant with the per-cpu optimizations i suggested in the previous
mail: because it's only the scalability of cpu_hotplug_lock() that will
improve [dramatically], its locking semantics wont.
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-08-24 11:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-08-24 10:26 Gautham R Shenoy
2006-08-24 10:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-08-24 11:27 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2006-08-24 11:24 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2006-08-24 16:17 ` Andrew Morton
2006-08-25 9:50 ` Dave Jones
2006-08-26 21:09 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-08-26 22:04 ` Andrew Morton
2006-08-27 6:11 ` Dipankar Sarma
2006-08-27 6:46 ` Andrew Morton
2006-08-27 7:11 ` Dipankar Sarma
2006-08-27 7:42 ` Andrew Morton
2006-08-27 8:57 ` Nick Piggin
2006-08-27 11:06 ` Dipankar Sarma
2006-08-27 17:21 ` Andrew Morton
2006-08-27 17:49 ` Dipankar Sarma
2006-08-27 18:01 ` Andrew Morton
2006-08-27 7:37 ` Dipankar Sarma
2006-08-27 7:57 ` Andrew Morton
2006-08-26 22:05 ` Ingo Molnar
2006-08-26 22:25 ` Andrew Morton
2006-08-28 2:37 ` Srivatsa Vaddagiri
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20060824112422.GA21121@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=arjan@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ashok.raj@intel.com \
--cc=davej@redhat.com \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
--cc=vatsa@in.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome