On 01/09, Davidlohr Bueso wrote: > > Gents, any further thoughts on this?
Both look correct to me, and I think this allows us to make more optimizations in percpu-rwsem.c. I am not sure about the naming... Yes, it relies on rcu but this is just implementation detail. But this is cosmetic and I can't suggest something better than rcuwait. Well, speaking of naming, rcuwait_trywake() doesn't look good to me, rcuwait_wake_up() looks better, "try" is misleading imo. But this is cosmetic/subjective too. Reviewed-by: Oleg Nesterov <o...@redhat.com>