[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20070807183946.GA32110@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 11:39:46 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, dipankar@...ibm.com,
josht@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, tytso@...ibm.com, dvhltc@...ibm.com,
tglx@...utronix.de
Subject: [PATCH 0/4 RFC] preemptible RCU
Hello!
This patchset is an update of that posted by Dipankar last January
(http://lkml.org/lkml/2007/1/15/133). This is work in progress, not yet
ready for inclusion. It passes rcutorture on i386, x86_64, and ppc64
boxes as well as kernbench, so should be safe for experimentation. As
with Dipankar's previous post, this variant of preemptible rcu_read_lock()
and rcu_read_unlock may be invoked from NMI/SMI handlers, and do not
contain any heavyweight atomic operations or memory barriers (although
they do still momentarily disable IRQs). This patchset features
a fully parallel grace-period computation, which will become increasingly
important with upcoming multicore/multi-threaded CPUs. In addition,
this patchset provides a preemptible-RCU variant of synchronize_sched()
that avoids the previous deadlock with CPU hotplug -- this variant may
eventually prove unnecessary, but is offered in the spirit of separating
concerns.
Next steps: (1) Integrate with CPU hotplug. (2) Re-merge RCU priority
boosting. (3) Fix some naming issues. Longer term work includes
optimized dyntick operation and eliminating the interrupt disabling
in rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock().
Thanx, Paul
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists