Message-ID: <4185FC4B.30804@yahoo.com.au>
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 20:05:15 +1100
From: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040820 Debian/1.7.2-4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Dominik Brodowski <linux@dominikbrodowski.de>
CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au,
       Zwane Mwaikambo <zwane@linuxpower.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [CPU-HOTPLUG] convert cpucontrol to be a rwsem
References: <20041101084337.GA7824@dominikbrodowski.de>
In-Reply-To: <20041101084337.GA7824@dominikbrodowski.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1195
Lines: 25

Dominik Brodowski wrote:
> [CPU-HOTPLUG] Use a rw-semaphore for serializing and locking
> 
> Currently, lock_cpu_hotplug serializes multiple calls to cpufreq->target()
> on multiple CPUs even though that's unneccessary. Even further, it
> serializes these calls with totally unrelated other parts of the kernel...
> some ppc64 event reporting, some cache management, and so on. In my opinion
> locking should be done subsystem (and normally data-)specific, and disabling
> CPU hotplug should just do that.
> 
> This patch converts the semaphore cpucontrol to be a rwsem which allows us 
> to use it for _both_ variants: locking (write) and (multiple) other parts 
> disabling CPU hotplug (read).
> 
> Only problem I see with this approach is that lock_cpu_hotplug_interruptible()
> needs to disappear as there is no down_write_interruptible() for rw-semaphores.
> 

I think I've got a patch somewhere to implement _interruptible operations
on rwsems.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/