to den 31.03.2005 Klokka 21:09 (+0400) skreiv Nikita Danilov:
> > You are assuming that all the waiters on the queue are tasks that must
> > sleep if they cannot take the lock. That is not the case here. Whereas
> > some users will indeed fall in this category, I expect that most will
> > rather want to use the non-blocking mode in which the caller is free to
> > go off and do other useful work.
>
> Ah, I see... But this doesn't look like semaphore _at_ _all_. Semaphores
> have no call-backs, and in iosem case it's callback (in the form of
> struct work_struct) that is central to the interface. I belive naming should
> reflect this, it's utterly confusing as it is. Maybe struct
> work_queue_token and schedule_work_{with,end}_token()?
That would be equally confusing. The lock exists to serialize _BOTH_
tasks and work queue items.
For instance the NFSv4 OPEN takes the token synchronously, and it needs
to be serialized w.r.t. the asynchronous CLOSE or OPEN_DOWNGRADE.
Cheers,
Trond
--
Trond Myklebust <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
