Re: [PATCH 07/10] generic rwsem: implement down_read_critical() / up_read_critical()

[Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>]

On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 03:44:24PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> You didn't update the comment for the new name here...
> 
> > - when the rwsem is write owned, down_read_unfair() callers get queued in
> >   front of threads trying to acquire the rwsem by other means.
> 
> .. or here. In this case, it really is more about "unfairness", but I'm 
> not convinced it should be so in the naming anyway, even if internally it 
> might be __down_read_unfair. "critical" I think covers both.

Gah! Sorry for missing the comment updates. I agree with you on the naming,
I just didn't remember about the comment.

Will send identical patch with the correct comment as reply to this.

> Anyway, the series looks mostly acceptable to me in this form. I think it 
> conceptually works out, and I think that the non-preemption guarantee 
> should mean that starvation of writers is not likely an issue. However, 
> I'd definitely like some second opinions on it. I'm not going to apply 
> this series without acks from people. So you should try to convince DavidH 
> too that this actually really does matter and makes sense.

I'll see what I can do here. Thanks !

-- 
Michel "Walken" Lespinasse
A program is never fully debugged until the last user dies.