On Fri, 13 Apr 2007 14:31:52 +0100
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> wrote:
If space considerations are that important, we could then reserve one bit for the 'wait_lock spinlock'
0x20000000 : one cpu gained control of 'wait_list'
This would save 4 bytes on 32 bit platforms.
64 bit platforms could have a limit of 2^60 threads, instead of the way too small 2^28 one ;)
(we loose the debug version of spinlock of course)
Another possibility to save space would be to move wait_lock/wait_list outside of rw_semaphore, in a hashed global array.
This would save 12/16 bytes per rw_semaphore (inode structs are probably the most demanding)
-