Re: [PATCH 1/3] rhashtable: use cmpxchg() in nested_table_alloc()
From: Herbert Xu
Date: Wed Mar 20 2019 - 01:41:21 EST
On Fri, Mar 15, 2019 at 05:51:55PM +1100, NeilBrown wrote:
> I hoped the patch could be justified on the basis that the current
> behaviour is fragile - the dependency that a single spin lock covers a
> while slot (and all children) in the top-level nested table is not at
> all obvious.
> I do have a stronger reason though - I want the replace the spinlocks
> with bit-spin-locks. With those we will only hold a lock for the
> particular chain being worked on. If you need that extra explanation to
> justify the patch, I'll hold it over until the other two patches land
> and the rest of the bit-spin-lock series is ready.
I think it would make more sense to combine this patch with your
bit-spin-lock patch in a series.
Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt