Re: [01/04 mm-patch, rfc] Add lightweight rwlock

[Frederik Deweerdt <deweerdt@free.fr>]

On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 04:06:15PM +0900, Masatake YAMATO wrote:
Hi,
> > The following set of patches adds a struct lw_rwlock (for lightweight
> > rwlock) which contains a spin_lock_t and an atomic_t. It is defined
> > in include/linux/lw_rwlock.h.
> 
> I think the name, "lightweight" is too generic. 
Fair enough.
> It implies just lw_rwlock is better than rwlock. The name may lead that people 
> use lw_rwlock rather than rwlock any place through there are places where 
> rwlock is better than lw_rwlock. So I looked for the name:
> 
> sw_rwlock: seldom writing rwlock
> wp_rwlock: write pricey rwlock

write expensive, we_rwlock? I like your idea of stressing the fact that
the protected data has to be seldom modified if you intend to use this
kind of lock.

> rp_rwlock: read prioritized rwlock
> 
I'll re-submit the patch with a proper naming for the rc3-mm1. However, I'd
like to get some feedback on the code itself: the current
whatever_rwlock code won't be debuggable with lockdep, and I'm not sure
there's not some more clever way to do it.

Thanks,
Frederik