Re: [PATCH] arch/tile: fix rwlock so would-be write lockers don'tblock new readers

[Chris Metcalf]

On 11/22/2010 8:36 PM, Cypher Wu wrote:
> Say, if core A try to write_lock() rwlock and current_ticket_ is 0 and
> it write next_ticket_ to 1, when it processing the lock, core B try to
> write_lock() again and write next_ticket_ to 2, then when A
> write_unlock() it seen that (current_ticket_+1) is not equal to
> next_ticket_, so it increment current_ticket_, and core B get the
> lock. If core A try write_lock again before core B write_unlock, it
> will increment next_ticket_ to 3. And so on.
> This may rarely happened, I've tested it yesterday for several hours
> it goes very well under pressure.

This should be OK when it happens (other than starving out the readers, but
that was the decision made by doing a ticket lock in the first place). 
Even if we wrap around 255 back to zero on the tickets, the ticket queue
will work correctly.  The key is not to need more than 256 concurrent write
lock waiters, which we don't.

-- 
Chris Metcalf, Tilera Corp.
http://www.tilera.com

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/