Re: [PATCH] (0/8) replace brlock with RCU
David S. Miller (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Tue, 11 Mar 2003 16:28:31 -0800 (PST)
From: Linus Torvalds <email@example.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 16:23:24 -0800 (PST)
On 11 Mar 2003, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> The following sequence of patches replaces the remaining use of brlock
> with RCU. Most of this is fairly straightforward. The unregister functions
> use synchronize_kernel(), perhaps there should be a special version to
> indicate sychronizing with network BH.
I'm not going to take this directly, but if it passes muster with David,
I'm happy. The fewer locking primitives we need, the better, and brlocks
have had enough problems that I wouldn't mind getting rid of them.
I'm fine with it, as long as I get shown how to get the equivalent
atomic sequence using the new primitives. Ie. is there still a way
with the new stuff?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to firstname.lastname@example.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/