Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 11:05:47 +1200 From: Andrew Thompson <thompsa@FreeBSD.org> To: Kip Macy <kip.macy@gmail.com> Cc: Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org>, Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@freebsd.org>, Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@freebsd.org>, Kip Macy <kmacy@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 126330 for review Message-ID: <20070912230547.GB63121@heff.fud.org.nz> In-Reply-To: <b1fa29170709121549m7218965fs2682c8b5bd63e58b@mail.gmail.com> References: <200709120832.l8C8WLlm085731@repoman.freebsd.org> <20070912150017.GA3553@garage.freebsd.pl> <b1fa29170709121450r5f59430bqa13373fdf807cadc@mail.gmail.com> <3bbf2fe10709121530h6d0681c4xa247fe7d31cb2c2e@mail.gmail.com> <20070912223833.GC4909@garage.freebsd.pl> <b1fa29170709121549m7218965fs2682c8b5bd63e58b@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 03:49:55PM -0700, Kip Macy wrote: > Andrew Thompson explicitly asked for the possibility of shared acquisition. I dont have a use for shared acquisition at the moment but I imagine it could be handy. > On 9/12/07, Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@freebsd.org> wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2007 at 12:30:26AM +0200, Attilio Rao wrote: > > > 2007/9/12, Kip Macy <kip.macy@gmail.com>: > > > > On 9/12/07, Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Sep 12, 2007 at 08:32:21AM +0000, Kip Macy wrote: > > > > > > http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=126330 > > > > > > > > > > > > Change 126330 by kmacy@kmacy_home:ethng on 2007/09/12 08:31:36 > > > > > > > > > > > > convert radix node head and route locks from mutexes to rwlocks > > > > > [...] > > > > > > rt->rt_flags |= RTF_LLINFO; > > > > > > - callout_init_mtx(&la->la_timer, &rt->rt_mtx, > > > > > > - CALLOUT_RETURNUNLOCKED); > > > > > > + callout_init_rwlock(&la->la_timer, &rt->rt_lock, > > > > > > + CALLOUT_RETURNUNLOCKED_RW); > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kip, don't add callout_init_rwlock() to the tree. I've > > > > > callout_init_lock() implemented that operates on any lock type, just > > > > > like condvar(9). > > > > > > > > point me to a diff > > > > > > I'm courious to know another thing instead. > > > As like condvar() works, it is allowed to before release and later > > > acquire the lock. > > > This scheme let you acquire the lock again following the previous > > > pattern for sx and rw locks (if for example you had a rwlock mantained > > > in write mode you will acquire it in the same way). > > > This is not applicable to callout, instead, as you have the lock > > > 'blank', so with double-kind locks (like rw and sx) how do you lock > > > it? > > > > Always write/exclusive. > > > > -- > > Pawel Jakub Dawidek http://www.wheel.pl > > pjd@FreeBSD.org http://www.FreeBSD.org > > FreeBSD committer Am I Evil? Yes, I Am! > > > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070912230547.GB63121>