| To: | linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | mrlocks vs. rw_semaphores |
| From: | Alexander Kabaev <ak03@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 24 Dec 2002 11:40:16 -0500 |
| Organization: | Verizon Data Services |
| Sender: | linux-xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Looking through XFS change history, I noticed that several uses of mrlocks in the tree have been replaced with Linux's native rw_semaphores. What was the reason for this? Are rw_semaphores performing significantly better than mrlocks, or is there a subtle difference in their semantics which make rw_semaphores more suitable for the places they are used in now? -- Alexander Kabaev |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Kernel recompile problems on RH8.0, Jameel Akari |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | xfsprogs man page, ASANO Masahiro |
| Previous by Thread: | Kernel recompile problems on RH8.0, Matt Schillinger |
| Next by Thread: | Re: mrlocks vs. rw_semaphores, Stephen Lord |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |