Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 0/2] enable irqs when waiting for rwlocks
From: Petr Tesarik <ptesarik@suse.cz>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org
In-Reply-To: <1224777451.11530.52.camel@elijah.suse.cz>
References: <1224777451.11530.52.camel@elijah.suse.cz>
Content-Type: text/plain
Organization: SUSE LINUX
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 09:52:22 +0100
Message-Id: <1225443142.6825.4.camel@elijah.suse.cz>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1189
Lines: 30

On Thu, 2008-10-23 at 18:08 +0200, Petr Tesarik wrote:
> New in V2:
>  * get rid of ugly #ifdef's in kernel/spinlock.h
>  * convert __raw_{read|write}_lock_flags to an inline func
> 
> SGI has observed that on large systems, interrupts are not serviced for
> a long period of time when waiting for a rwlock. The following patch
> series re-enables irqs while waiting for the lock, resembling the code
> which is already there for spinlocks.
> 
> I only made the ia64 version, because the patch adds some overhead to
> the fast path. I assume there is currently no demand to have this for
> other architectures, because the systems are not so large. Of course,
> the possibility to implement raw_{read|write}_lock_flags for any
> architecture is still there.
> 
> Petr Tesarik

Any comments on my second patch series? Not even an Acked-by? Dislike of
the concept? Should I post it again?

I feel a bit too uncertain what the status is...

Petr

--
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/