Paul M wrote:
> cpuset.c:update_nodemask() uses a write_lock_irq() on tasklist_lock to
> block concurrent forks; a read_lock() suffices and is less intrusive.
Seems reasonable to me - thanks.
> - write_lock_irq(&tasklist_lock); /* block fork */
> + read_lock(&tasklist_lock); /* block fork */
> if (atomic_read(&cs->count) <= ntasks)
> break; /* got enough */
> - write_unlock_irq(&tasklist_lock); /* try again */
> + read_unlock(&tasklist_lock); /* try again */
Too bad you didn't keep the nicely aligned comments aligned ;).
--
I won't rest till it's the best ...
Programmer, Linux Scalability
Paul Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 1.925.600.0401
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
