From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com ([66.249.82.226]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtp (Exim 4.68 #1 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1KWBkR-0001N3-6k for linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org; Thu, 21 Aug 2008 15:06:51 +0000 Received: by wx-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id h28so17583wxd.24 for ; Thu, 21 Aug 2008 08:06:50 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <6934efce0808210806r701f2e3bo677d2bd2da78faec@mail.gmail.com> Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 08:06:50 -0700 From: "Jared Hulbert" To: "Arnd Bergmann" Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/10] AXFS: axfs_inode.c In-Reply-To: <200808211417.14425.arnd@arndb.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <48AD00F0.5030403@gmail.com> <200808211417.14425.arnd@arndb.de> Cc: cotte@de.ibm.com, linux-embedded@vger.kernel.org, nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, =?UTF-8?Q?J=C3=B6rn_Engel?= , Linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mtd , tim.bird@am.sony.com List-Id: Linux MTD discussion mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , > Have you seen any benefit of the rwsem over a simple mutex? I would guess > that you can never even get into the situation where you get concurrent > readers since I haven't found a single down_read() in your code, only > downgrade_write() We implemented a rwsem here because you can get concurrent readers. My understanding is that downgrade_write() puts the rewem into the same state as down_read(). Am I mistaken?