Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] lib/dlock-list: Distributed and lock-protected lists

From: Waiman Long
Date: Fri Jul 22 2016 - 16:58:24 EST

On 07/19/2016 02:42 PM, Waiman Long wrote:
On 07/18/2016 07:38 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:

+ * include/linux/dlock-list.h
+ *
+ * A distributed (per-cpu) set of lists each of which is protected by its
+ * own spinlock, but acts like a single consolidated list to the callers.
+ *
+ * The dlock_list_head_percpu structure contains the spinlock, the other
+ * dlock_list_node structures only contains a pointer to the spinlock in
+ * dlock_list_head_percpu.
+ */
The more I think about it, the more bothered I'm about the dlock_list
name. For the most part, this isn't different from other percpu data
structures in the kernel. Sure, it might benefit from doing Nth cpu,
but so are other percpu data structures and it's not just "distributed
lock" list either. The list itself is percpu, not just locking. Can
we please go back to percpu_list? Christoph, what do you think?

As I said before, I don't mind reverting the name back to percpu_list. I am just waiting for a final agreement.

I have just sent out an update dlock-list patch that incorporates all the feedbacks that I got so far except the name change. I will be on vacation next week. After I come back, we can continue our discussion if the name should be reverted back to percpu_list or not.