On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 11:29 PM, Mulyadi Santosa <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Prasad Joshi<[email protected]> > wrote: > > I am working on Porting of a windows device driver to Linux. Windows has > a > > notion of Queued Spinlock. I could not understand how it is different > than > > normal spinlock, the document says it is faster than a normal spinlock. > > > > If any one is having more information on Queued Spinlock, please share. > > > > Is there any equivalent Spinlock in Linux to Queued Spinlock? > > Hm, I think this document explains a bit about queued spinlock: > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa490204.aspx > > AFAIK, Linux's spin lock doesn't guarantee ordering. So, the best > Linux alternative is just use normal spinlock. > > NB: Perhaps you should question yourself first "do we really need > locking ordering in First Come First served here?" > Linux uses 'ticket spinlocks', at least on x86 architecture. I had never heard of MS's queued spinlocks before, but this seems to be similar. See arch/x86/include/asm/spinlock.h -- Michel "Walken" Lespinasse A program is never fully debugged until the last user dies.
