From: Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org>
To: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>,
Suparna Bhattacharya <suparna@in.ibm.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Linux Filesystem Development <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-aio@kvack.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] Add support for semaphore-like structure with support for asynchronous I/O
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 19:42:13 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050415234213.GC11761@kvack.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1113604974.27810.75.camel@lade.trondhjem.org>
On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 03:42:54PM -0700, Trond Myklebust wrote:
> AFAICS You grab the wait_queue_t lock once in down()/__mutex_lock()
> order to try to take the lock (or queue the waiter if that fails), then
> once more in order to pass the mutex on to the next waiter on
> up()/mutex_unlock(). That is more or less the exact same thing I was
> doing with iosems using bog-standard waitqueues, and which Ben has
> adapted to his mutexes. What am I missing?
I didn't quite see that either.
What about the use of atomic operations on frv? Are they more lightweight
than a semaphore, making for a better fastpath?
-ben
--
"Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once." -- John Wheeler
--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-aio' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux AIO,
see: http://www.kvack.org/aio/
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"aart@kvack.org">aart@kvack.org</a>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-04-15 23:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-03-30 21:51 [RFC] Add support for semaphore-like structure with support for asynchronous I/O Trond Myklebust
2005-03-30 22:34 ` Andrew Morton
2005-03-30 23:17 ` Trond Myklebust
2005-03-30 23:44 ` Andrew Morton
2005-03-31 0:02 ` Trond Myklebust
2005-03-31 22:53 ` Trond Myklebust
2005-04-01 0:13 ` Andrew Morton
2005-04-01 1:22 ` Trond Myklebust
2005-04-01 14:12 ` Suparna Bhattacharya
2005-04-04 15:52 ` Suparna Bhattacharya
2005-04-04 16:22 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2005-04-04 17:56 ` Trond Myklebust
2005-04-05 15:46 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2005-04-06 1:20 ` Trond Myklebust
2005-04-06 5:17 ` Bill Huey
2005-04-06 5:01 ` Suparna Bhattacharya
2005-04-07 11:43 ` Christoph Hellwig
2005-04-08 22:39 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2005-04-08 23:31 ` Trond Myklebust
2005-04-10 14:08 ` Suparna Bhattacharya
2005-04-15 16:13 ` David Howells
2005-04-15 22:42 ` Trond Myklebust
2005-04-15 23:42 ` Benjamin LaHaise [this message]
2005-04-16 11:12 ` David Howells
2005-04-16 11:06 ` David Howells
2005-04-04 16:39 ` Trond Myklebust
2005-03-31 8:02 ` Nikita Danilov
2005-03-31 12:31 ` Trond Myklebust
2005-03-31 17:09 ` Nikita Danilov
2005-03-31 17:22 ` Trond Myklebust
2005-03-31 17:32 ` Trond Myklebust
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=20050415234213.GC11761@kvack.org \
--to=bcrl@kvack.org \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=hch@infradead.org \
--cc=linux-aio@kvack.org \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=suparna@in.ibm.com \
--cc=trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).