> > I guess it was done to make the "template" hacks eaiser. I don't
> > really find that in good taste, especially for important core
> > infrastructure. Anyway.
>
> Actually, what I had/have is a cond_resched_rwlock() that I needed to
> convert the i_mmap_lock() to rw for testing reclaim scalability.
> [I've seen a large system running an Oracle OLTP load hang spitting
> "cpu soft lockup" messages with all cpus spinning on a i_mmap_lock
> spin lock.] One of the i_mmap_lock paths uses cond_resched_lock() for
> spin locks. To do a straight forward conversion [and maybe that isn't
> the right approach], I created the cond_resched_rwlock() function by
> generalizing the cond_sched_lock() code and creating both spin and rw
> lock wrappers. I took advantage of the fact that, currently,
> need_lockbreak() is a macro and that both spin and rw locks have/had
> the break_lock member. Typesafe functions would probably be
> preferrable, if we want to keep break_lock for rw spin locks.
>
> Here's the most recent posting:
>
>
http://marc.info/?l=linux-mm&m=118980356306014&w=4
>
> See the changes to sched.[ch]. Should apply to 23-mm1 with offsets
> and minor fixup in fs/inode.c.
