10 Feb
2011
10 Feb
'11
2:25 p.m.
On Thursday 10 February 2011 11:42:50 Linus Lüssing wrote:
Would speak anything against re-using the gw_list_lock ?
... as we are usually changing the gw_list more often than the curr_gw, so it's not really necessary to let a gw_list change for another node wait for a curr_gw_node reassignment to finish.
Well, we only need the list lock when we are adding/deleting items from the list which does not happen that often nor is it time critical.
What is speaking for using the same lock for both, just having less spinlocks in total in the code?
Yes.
Regards, Marek