RE: recursive spinlocks. Shoot.

From: Rik van Riel (riel@imladris.surriel.com)
Date: Wed May 21 2003 - 20:00:46 EST


On Mon, 19 May 2003, Robert White wrote:

> In point of fact, "proper" locking, when combined with "proper"
> definitions of an interface dictate that recursive locking is "better".
> Demanding that a call_EE_ know what locks a call_ER_ (and all
> antecedents of caller) will have taken is not exactly good design.

So call_EE_ messes with the data structure which call_ER_
has locked, unexpectedly because the recursive locking
doesn't show up as an error.

Looks like recursive locking would just make debugging
harder.

Rik

-- 
Engineers don't grow up, they grow sideways.
http://www.surriel.com/		http://kernelnewbies.org/
-
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/



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri May 23 2003 - 22:00:47 EST