[lkml]   [2018]   [May]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] [RFC] bcachefs: SIX locks (shared/intent/exclusive)
On Mon, May 21, 2018 at 10:19:51PM -0400, Kent Overstreet wrote:
> New lock for bcachefs, like read/write locks but with a third state,
> intent.
> Intent locks conflict with each other, but not with read locks; taking a
> write lock requires first holding an intent lock.

Can you put something in the description that these are sleeping locks
(like mutexes), not spinning locks (like spinlocks)? (Yeah, I know
there's the opportunistic spin, but conceptually, they're sleeping locks).

Some other things I'd like documented:

- Any number of readers can hold the lock
- Once one thread acquires the lock for intent, further intent acquisitions
will block. May new readers acquire the lock?
- You cannot acquire the lock for write directly, you must acquire it for
intent first, then upgrade to write.
- Can you downgrade to read from intent, or downgrade from write back to
- Once you are trying to upgrade from intent to write, are new read
acquisitions blocked? (can readers starve writers?)
- When you drop the lock as a writer, do we prefer reader acquisitions
over intent acquisitions? That is, if we have a queue of RRIRIRIR,
and we drop the lock, does the queue look like II or IRIR?

 \ /
  Last update: 2018-05-22 05:04    [W:0.111 / U:1.104 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site