> What I have in mind is to have 2 separate rwlock initializers - one for > fair and one for reader-bias behavior. So the lock owners can decide > what behavior do they want with a one line change.
That's definitely a nicer patch, if it will work. I was imagining that, even for a single (type of) lock, only a few uses require reader bias (because they might be recursive, or are in an interrupt), but you'd want most read_lock sites to be fair. Deciding on a per-lock basis means that one potentially recursive call means you can't use fair queueing anywhere. I was hoping that the number of necessary unfair calls would be small enough that making the read_lock default fair and only marking the unfair call sites would be enough. But I don't really know until doing a survey of the calls. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
