On Sat, 23 Aug 2008, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
>
> Bug-Entry : http://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11410
> Subject : SLUB list_lock vs obj_hash.lock...
> Submitter : Daniel J Blueman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date : 2008-08-22 21:48 (2 days old)
> References : http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121944176609042&w=4
This one now has a suggested patch for Daniel to try from Vegard, but no
reply yet:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=121946972307110&w=4
Vegard, I think your patch is a bit odd, though. The result of your patch
is
- first loop:
hlist_for_each_entry_safe(obj, node, tmp, &db->list, node) {
hlist_del(&obj->node);
hlist_add_head(&obj->node, &freelist);
}
and quite frankly, I don't see what the difference between that and a
something like a simple
struct hlist_node *first = bd->list.first;
if (first) {
bd->list.first = NULL;
first->pprev = &first;
}
really is?
I dunno. We don't have list splicing ops for the hlist things.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
