Allow me to display my ignorance a moment.
Are there blocking lock primitives already defined somewhere in the
kernel?
It just seems that
while( lockvar )
sleep_on( &lockwaitq );
along with its various permutations would be commonly used and worthy of
being made into a generic sleep lock. A few blind greps through the
source didn't find anything that caught my eye.
If there aren't, would a patch to add them be of interest to anyone?
Input on design details welcome.
TIA,
Eli
--------------------. "To the systems programmer, users and applications
Eli Carter | serve only to provide a test load."
[email protected] `---------------------------------- (random fortune)
> Are there blocking lock primitives already defined somewhere in the
> kernel?
down and up are normally appropriate for this
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > Are there blocking lock primitives already defined somewhere in the
> > kernel?
>
> down and up are normally appropriate for this
Ungh. Forest. Trees. *sigh* Sorry for the dumb question.
Thanks for the reply Alan. :)
Ok, second part of the question: What about blocking read/write locks
(with _interruptible variants)?
TIA,
Eli
--------------------. "To the systems programmer, users and applications
Eli Carter | serve only to provide a test load."
[email protected] `---------------------------------- (random fortune)
In message <[email protected]> you write:
> Alan Cox wrote:
> >
> > > Are there blocking lock primitives already defined somewhere in the
> > > kernel?
> >
> > down and up are normally appropriate for this
>
> Ungh. Forest. Trees. *sigh* Sorry for the dumb question.
> Thanks for the reply Alan. :)
>
> Ok, second part of the question: What about blocking read/write locks
> (with _interruptible variants)?
Documentation/DocBook/kernel-locking*
Rusty.
--
Hacking time.
Rusty Russell wrote:
>
> In message <[email protected]> you write:
> > Alan Cox wrote:
> > >
> > > > Are there blocking lock primitives already defined somewhere in the
> > > > kernel?
> > >
> > > down and up are normally appropriate for this
> >
> > Ungh. Forest. Trees. *sigh* Sorry for the dumb question.
> > Thanks for the reply Alan. :)
> >
> > Ok, second part of the question: What about blocking read/write locks
> > (with _interruptible variants)?
>
> Documentation/DocBook/kernel-locking*
>
> Rusty.
> --
> Hacking time.
Perhaps I should have specified that I'm working with 2.2.xy....
I'll d/l a 2.4.0-test and look at the docbook in that. Thanks for the
pointer.
Eli
--------------------. "To the systems programmer, users and applications
Eli Carter | serve only to provide a test load."
[email protected] `---------------------------------- (random fortune)