On 02/11/2013 06:11 PM, David Howells wrote:
> Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
>
>> We can use global rwlocks as shown below safely, without fear of deadlocks:
>>
>> Readers:
>>
>> CPU 0CPU 1
>> -- --
>>
>> 1.spin
Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> We can use global rwlocks as shown below safely, without fear of deadlocks:
>
> Readers:
>
> CPU 0CPU 1
> -- --
>
> 1.spin_lock(&random_lock); read_lock(&my_rwlock)
On 01/23, Michel Lespinasse wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >
> > I thought global locks are now fair. That is, a reader will block if a
> > writer is waiting. Hence, the above should deadlock on the current
> > rwlock_t types.
>
> I believe you are mistaken he
On Tue, Jan 22, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-01-22 at 13:03 +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
>> A straight-forward (and obvious) algorithm to implement Per-CPU Reader-Writer
>> locks can also lead to too many deadlock possibilities which can make it very
>> hard/impossible
On Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:03:22 +0530
"Srivatsa S. Bhat" wrote:
> A straight-forward (and obvious) algorithm to implement Per-CPU Reader-Writer
> locks can also lead to too many deadlock possibilities which can make it very
> hard/impossible to use. This is explained in the example below, which help
On Wed, 2013-01-23 at 01:28 +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> > I thought global locks are now fair. That is, a reader will block if a
> > writer is waiting. Hence, the above should deadlock on the current
> > rwlock_t types.
> >
>
> Oh is it? Last I checked, lockdep didn't complain about this AB
On 01/23/2013 01:02 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-01-22 at 13:03 +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
>> A straight-forward (and obvious) algorithm to implement Per-CPU Reader-Writer
>> locks can also lead to too many deadlock possibilities which can make it very
>> hard/impossible to use. Thi
On 01/23/2013 12:15 AM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jan 2013 13:03:22 +0530
> "Srivatsa S. Bhat" wrote:
>
>> A straight-forward (and obvious) algorithm to implement Per-CPU Reader-Writer
>> locks can also lead to too many deadlock possibilities which can make it very
>> hard/impossible
On Tue, 2013-01-22 at 13:03 +0530, Srivatsa S. Bhat wrote:
> A straight-forward (and obvious) algorithm to implement Per-CPU Reader-Writer
> locks can also lead to too many deadlock possibilities which can make it very
> hard/impossible to use. This is explained in the example below, which helps
>
A straight-forward (and obvious) algorithm to implement Per-CPU Reader-Writer
locks can also lead to too many deadlock possibilities which can make it very
hard/impossible to use. This is explained in the example below, which helps
justify the need for a different algorithm to implement flexible Pe
10 matches
Mail list logo
