> 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. -- 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/
