On Thu, Jul 24, 2008 at 09:06:51PM +1000, Nick Piggin wrote:
On Thursday 24 July 2008 20:55, Miklos Szeredi wrote:
quoted
On Thu, 24 Jul 2008, Nick Piggin wrote:
quoted
Hey, something kind of cool (and OT) I've just thought of that we can
do with ticket locks is to take tickets for 2 (or 64K) nested locks,
and then wait for them both (all), so the cost is N*lock + longest spin,
rather than N*lock + N*avg spin.
Isn't this deadlocky?
E.g. one task takes ticket x=1, then other task comes in and takes x=2
and y=1, then first task takes y=2. Then neither can actually
complete both locks.
Oh duh of course you still need mutual exclusion from the first lock
to order the subsequent :P
So yeah it only works for N > 2 locks, and you have to spin_lock the
first one... so unsuitable for scheduler.
Or sort the locks by address or some such.
Thanx, Paul
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html