Re: Two other ways to do latched seqcounts

["George Spelvin" <linux@horizon.com>]

> I'm assuming you're writing to me because of the latched rb-tree;
> because that's the most recent related thing I posted ;-)

Basically yes, although it was the documentation you added to the
latched seqlock code in particular.

I haven't checked the users of your rb-tree code to see how large and
frequently read the trees are, but if a read is expensive, then avoiding
retries by incrementing the seqlock twice per update starts to become
interesting.