From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com (Mathieu Desnoyers) Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2016 15:50:45 +0000 (UTC) Subject: [lttng-dev] Do updaters of a cds_lfht need to be synchronized? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1821874660.10064.1477929045393.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> ----- On Oct 28, 2016, at 11:40 AM, Charles Jacobsen wrote: > The documentation for the lock-free hash table does not mention anything about > synchronizing updaters (e.g., with a lock): > [ https://lwn.net/Articles/573431/ | https://lwn.net/Articles/573431/ ] > [ https://lwn.net/Articles/573432/ | https://lwn.net/Articles/573432/ ] > The source for rculfhash (== cds_lfht?) also mentions in the comments that add > and remove are lock free: > [ https://github.com/urcu/userspace-rcu/blob/master/src/rculfhash.c | > https://github.com/urcu/userspace-rcu/blob/master/src/rculfhash.c ] > Is it safe to assume that cds_lfht_add, cds_lfht_add_unique, and so on, *only* > require a surrounding rcu read lock/unlock? > "lock free" is part of the name, so I would assume the answer is "yes". Yes, this assumption is correct. Thanks, Mathieu > Thank you. > Disclaimer > The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. > It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive > it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, > copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this > information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. > _______________________________________________ > lttng-dev mailing list > lttng-dev at lists.lttng.org > https://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev -- Mathieu Desnoyers EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: