On 02/11/2013 06:11 PM, David Howells wrote:
Srivatsa S. Bhat [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
We can use global rwlocks as shown below safely, without fear of deadlocks:
Readers:
CPU 0 CPU 1
------ ------
1. spin_lock(&random_lock); read_lock(&my_rwlock);
2. read_lock(&my_rwlock); spin_lock(&random_lock);
The lock order on CPU 0 is unsafe if CPU2 can do:
write_lock(&my_rwlock);
spin_lock(&random_lock);
and on CPU 1 if CPU2 can do:
spin_lock(&random_lock);
write_lock(&my_rwlock);
Right..
I presume you were specifically excluding these situations?
Yes.. Those cases are simple to find out and fix (by changing the
lock ordering). My main problem was with CPU 0 and CPU 1 as shown above..
... and using a global rwlock helps ease that part out.
Regards,
Srivatsa S. Bhat