Paul M wrote:
quoted text
> cpuset.c:update_nodemask() uses a write_lock_irq() on tasklist_lock to
> block concurrent forks; a read_lock() suffices and is less intrusive.

Seems reasonable to me - thanks.

quoted text
> -		write_lock_irq(&tasklist_lock);		/* block fork */
> +		read_lock(&tasklist_lock);		/* block fork */
>  		if (atomic_read(&cs->count) <= ntasks)
>  			break;				/* got enough */
> -		write_unlock_irq(&tasklist_lock);	/* try again */
> +		read_unlock(&tasklist_lock);	/* try again */

Too bad you didn't keep the nicely aligned comments aligned ;).

-- 
                  I won't rest till it's the best ...
                  Programmer, Linux Scalability
                  Paul Jackson <pj@sgi.com> 1.925.600.0401
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/