On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 11:49 PM, Konstantin Belousov <kostik...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Nov 02, 2014 at 11:37:57PM +0100, Attilio Rao wrote: >> On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 10:38 PM, Konstantin Belousov >> <kostik...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On Sun, Nov 02, 2014 at 10:17:26PM +0100, Attilio Rao wrote: >> >> I think that your initial patch (what is in head now) is a better >> >> approach. >> >> I would just make it a lockinit() flag to make it less alien to the KPI. >> >> >> > >> > Ok. >> > >> > Can you explain what would the proposed lockinit() flag do ? What should >> > it change comparing with the current code ? >> >> You now provide LK_NODDLKTREAT on a call basis. >> The lockinit() flag would embed this into the lock attribute and make >> it always real, without the need for the callers to provide >> LK_NODDLKTREAT on a call basis. > > Am I reading your proposal right ? Do you mean, that for all vnodes, > I should disable exclusive starvation avoidance at all ? I completely > disagree with this.
No, I'm saying that we should support doing this at the KPI level. Not that you should enable this for all the vnodes. Attilio -- Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
