All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Grant Grundler <iod00d@hp.com>
To: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Peter Chubb <peterc@gelato.unsw.edu.au>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	Darren Williams <dsw@gelato.unsw.edu.au>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, Chris Wedgwood <cw@f00f.org>,
	torvalds@osdl.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Ia64 Linux <linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: Horrible regression with -CURRENT from "Don't busy-lock-loop in preemptable spinlocks" patch
Date: Thu, 20 Jan 2005 05:49:35 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050120054935.GC11410@esmail.cup.hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <16878.54402.344079.528038@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com>

On Thu, Jan 20, 2005 at 08:43:30AM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> I suggest read_poll(), write_poll(), spin_poll(),...

Erm...those names sound way too much like existing interfaces.
Perhaps check_read_lock()/check_write_lock() ?

If they don't get used too much, the longer name should be ok.

grant

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Grant Grundler <iod00d@hp.com>
To: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Peter Chubb <peterc@gelato.unsw.edu.au>,
	Tony Luck <tony.luck@intel.com>,
	Darren Williams <dsw@gelato.unsw.edu.au>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>, Chris Wedgwood <cw@f00f.org>,
	torvalds@osdl.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Ia64 Linux <linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org>,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: Horrible regression with -CURRENT from "Don't busy-lock-loop in preemptable spinlocks" patch
Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 21:49:35 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050120054935.GC11410@esmail.cup.hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <16878.54402.344079.528038@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com>

On Thu, Jan 20, 2005 at 08:43:30AM +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> I suggest read_poll(), write_poll(), spin_poll(),...

Erm...those names sound way too much like existing interfaces.
Perhaps check_read_lock()/check_write_lock() ?

If they don't get used too much, the longer name should be ok.

grant

  parent reply	other threads:[~2005-01-20  5:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 87+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-01-17  5:50 Horrible regression with -CURRENT from "Don't busy-lock-loop in preemptable spinlocks" patch Chris Wedgwood
2005-01-17  7:09 ` Andrew Morton
2005-01-17  7:33   ` Chris Wedgwood
2005-01-17  7:50     ` Paul Mackerras
2005-01-17  8:00       ` Chris Wedgwood
2005-01-17 14:33   ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-18  1:47     ` Darren Williams
2005-01-18  1:47       ` Darren Williams
2005-01-18  4:28       ` Darren Williams
2005-01-18  4:28         ` Darren Williams
2005-01-18  7:08         ` Chris Wedgwood
2005-01-18  7:08           ` Chris Wedgwood
2005-01-19  0:14       ` Peter Chubb
2005-01-19  0:14         ` Peter Chubb
2005-01-19  8:04         ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-19  8:04           ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-19  9:18           ` Peter Chubb
2005-01-19  9:18             ` Peter Chubb
2005-01-19  9:20             ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-19  9:20               ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-19 21:43               ` Paul Mackerras
2005-01-19 21:43                 ` Paul Mackerras
2005-01-20  2:34                 ` [PATCH RFC] 'spinlock/rwlock fixes' V3 [1/1] Chris Wedgwood
2005-01-20  2:34                   ` Chris Wedgwood
2005-01-20  3:01                   ` Andrew Morton
2005-01-20  3:01                     ` Andrew Morton
2005-01-20  3:18                     ` Chris Wedgwood
2005-01-20  3:18                       ` Chris Wedgwood
2005-01-20  3:33                       ` Andrew Morton
2005-01-20  3:33                         ` Andrew Morton
2005-01-20  8:59                       ` Peter Chubb
2005-01-20  8:59                         ` Peter Chubb
2005-01-20 13:04                         ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 13:04                           ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 15:51                         ` Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 15:51                           ` Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 16:08                           ` [patch 1/3] spinlock fix #1, *_can_lock() primitives Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:08                             ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:11                             ` [patch 2/3] spinlock fix #2: generalize [spin|rw]lock yielding Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:11                               ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:12                               ` [patch 3/3] spinlock fix #3: type-checking spinlock primitives, x86 Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:12                                 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:14                                 ` [patch] stricter type-checking rwlock " Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:14                                   ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:16                                   ` [patch] minor spinlock cleanups Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:16                                     ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:31                             ` [patch 1/3] spinlock fix #1, *_can_lock() primitives Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 16:31                               ` Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 16:40                               ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:40                                 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 17:48                                 ` Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 17:48                                   ` Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 17:53                                   ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 17:53                                     ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 18:22                                     ` [patch, BK-curr] nonintrusive spin-polling loop in kernel/spinlock.c Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 18:22                                       ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 18:25                                       ` [patch, BK-curr] rename 'lock' to 'slock' in asm-i386/spinlock.h Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 18:25                                         ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 23:45                                       ` [patch, BK-curr] nonintrusive spin-polling loop in kernel/spinlock.c Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 23:45                                         ` Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 16:44                               ` [patch 1/3] spinlock fix #1, *_can_lock() primitives Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:44                                 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:59                                 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:59                                   ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:47                               ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:47                                 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:57                               ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:57                                 ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:05                       ` [PATCH RFC] 'spinlock/rwlock fixes' V3 [1/1] Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 16:05                         ` Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 16:20                         ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:20                           ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:18                   ` Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 16:18                     ` Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 16:23                     ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:23                       ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 17:30                       ` Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 17:30                         ` Linus Torvalds
2005-01-20 17:38                         ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 17:38                           ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:28                     ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20 16:28                       ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-20  5:49                 ` Grant Grundler [this message]
2005-01-20  5:49                   ` Horrible regression with -CURRENT from "Don't busy-lock-loop in preemptable spinlocks" patch Grant Grundler
2005-01-17  7:38 ` [PATCH] __get_cpu_var should use __smp_processor_id() not smp_processor_id() Chris Wedgwood
2005-01-17 14:40   ` Ingo Molnar
2005-01-17 18:53     ` Chris Wedgwood

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20050120054935.GC11410@esmail.cup.hp.com \
    --to=iod00d@hp.com \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=cw@f00f.org \
    --cc=dsw@gelato.unsw.edu.au \
    --cc=hch@infradead.org \
    --cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=peterc@gelato.unsw.edu.au \
    --cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.