Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2007 12:00:01 -0800 From: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> To: Max Laier <max@love2party.net> Cc: attilio@freebsd.org, Stephan Uphoff <ups@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: rwlocks, correctness over speed. Message-ID: <20071122200001.GI44563@elvis.mu.org> In-Reply-To: <200711221641.02484.max@love2party.net> References: <20071121222319.GX44563@elvis.mu.org> <200711221641.02484.max@love2party.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Max Laier <max@love2party.net> [071122 07:46] wrote: > On Wednesday 21 November 2007, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > > In summary, I am proposing (temporarily) making read-recursion > > on rwlocks not supported in order to avoid livelock due to writer > > starvation. > > > > rwlocks are already used in places that do recursive reads. The one place Max, I think what will happen is that we will mark further uses or read locks as recursive as "not supported", perhaps witness can temporarily grow a flag to ignore recursive read ops until the existing infrastructure is fixed. I will not get into alternatives for pfil, as it seems you've mostly worked it out. -Alfred
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20071122200001.GI44563>