From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC v1 0/5] fs/locks: Use plain percpu spinlocks instead of lglock to protect file_lock
Date: Fri, 20 Feb 2015 08:05:52 -0800
Message-ID: <87vbiwwotb.fsf@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
References: <1424443195-18676-1-git-send-email-daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@poochiereds.net>,
	linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	John Kacur <jkacur@redhat.com>,
	Alexander Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>,
	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de>
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <1424443195-18676-1-git-send-email-daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de>
	(Daniel Wagner's message of "Fri, 20 Feb 2015 15:39:50 +0100")
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

Daniel Wagner <daniel.wagner@bmw-carit.de> writes:
>
> I am looking at how to get rid of lglock. Reason being -rt is not too
> happy with that lock, especially that it uses arch_spinlock_t and

AFAIK it could just use normal spinlock. Have you tried that?

-Andi

-- 
ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only