a take at cache coherency
Simon 'corecode' Schubert
corecode at fs.ei.tum.de
Fri Jan 27 04:30:53 PST 2006
[forgot to post]
On 25.01.2006, at 14:41, Csaba Henk wrote:
I'd still use a ncp_shadowroot to get O(1) locking.
While you deref the the shadowroot pointer to go for the group lock,
the group might get broken up, and the shadowroot info will be stale.
This can't happen as we still have kernel locking. At the moment there
won't be any two threads running in parallel accessing namecache
records. Only if one of them blocks, another thread might sneak in.
So doing a ->ncp_shadowinfo->ncp_exlocks++ is guarranteed to work (at
the moment, when we make the namecache free of the BGL, we'll have to
change the lock to something more sophisticated, but we're not there
Serve - BSD +++ RENT this banner advert +++ ASCII Ribbon /"\
Work - Mac +++ space for low â¬â¬â¬ NOW!1 +++ Campaign \ /
Party Enjoy Relax | http://dragonflybsd.org Against HTML \
Dude 2c 2 the max ! http://golden-apple.biz Mail + News / \
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 186 bytes
Desc: "Description: This is a digitally signed message part"
More information about the Kernel