Lines Matching refs:you

25 The above is usually pretty simple (you usually need and want only one
28 sequences that you _know_ need to be split up: avoid it at all cost if you
31 This is really the only really hard part about spinlocks: once you start
32 using spinlocks they tend to expand to areas you might not have noticed
33 before, because you have to make sure the spinlocks correctly protect the
38    NOTE! The spin-lock is safe only when you _also_ use the lock itself
47 If your data accesses have a very natural pattern where you usually tend
54    simple spinlocks.  Unless the reader critical section is long, you
79 Also, you cannot "upgrade" a read-lock to a write-lock, so if you at _any_
80 time need to do any changes (even if you don't do it every time), you have
98 If you have a case where you have to protect a data structure across
99 several CPU's and you want to use spinlocks you can potentially use
100 cheaper versions of the spinlocks. IFF you know that the spinlocks are
101 never used in interrupt handlers, you can use the non-irq versions:
109 This is useful if you know that the data in question is only ever
112 The reasons you mustn't use these versions if you have interrupts that
113 play with the spinlock is that you can get deadlocks:
133 Note that you can be clever with read-write locks and interrupts. For
134 example, if you know that the interrupt only ever gets a read-lock, then
135 you can use a non-irq version of read locks everywhere - because they
137 But when you do the write-lock, you have to use the irq-safe version.