Re: [patch 0/5] seqlock consolidation

[Al Viro]

On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 01:28:03PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:

> The only way out is to lock d->d_lock which is contended, so the
> reader side boosts the writer and waits for the lock to be
> released. Though with the open coded seqlock we have no idea which
> lock we need to take.
> 
> Any better ideas ?

So basically you want RT stuff to know that several areas in fs/dcache.c
(from write_seqcount_begin() to write_seqcount_end()) are protected by
(already held by that point) ->d_lock of corresponding dentries?

If that's it, I suggest to look for a solution that would express just that...
Or do you want something on the reader side as well?
--
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/