WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-ia64-devel

Re: [Xen-ia64-devel][PATCH][VTD] small patches for VTD

On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 02:30:50PM +0800, Xu, Anthony wrote:
> Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 02:11:52PM +0800, Xu, Anthony wrote:
> >> Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> >>> On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 01:56:05PM +0800, Xu, Anthony wrote:
> >>>> Yes, it is not SMP-safe there is lock for p2m.
> >>>> Modifying p2m is not a frequent operation, why not add a lock for
> >>>> it?
> >>>
> >>> It is frequent to read p2m table. So lockless approach was adopted
> >>> for scalability. It doesn't make sense to lock around only writer
> >>> side.
> >>>
> >>
> >> If only add write lock for p2m, is there any bad impact/senario?
> >> Can you explain more details?
> >
> > Generally lock should protect both readers and writers.
> > So locking around only writers doesn't make sense.
> 
> 
> So you can use read/write lock, multiple reader one writer.
> Because write is very rare, it will not impact performance, but it makes code 
> in mm.c clear and easy to modify.
> I think that's why read/write lock exist.

Yes, that's quite right.
It's another discussion to go for reader/writer lock or
to keep the current lockless approach.

thanks,
-- 
yamahata

_______________________________________________
Xen-ia64-devel mailing list
Xen-ia64-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-ia64-devel