[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48AF1B81.3050806@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 15:03:13 -0500
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
To: paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
CC: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>,
Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...oo.com.au>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
"Pallipadi, Venkatesh" <venkatesh.pallipadi@...el.com>,
Suresh Siddha <suresh.b.siddha@...el.com>,
Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] smp_call_function: use rwlocks on queues rather than
rcu
Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> I was indeed thinking in terms of the free from RCU being specially marked.
Isnt there some way to shorten the rcu periods significantly? Critical
sections do not take that long after all.
If the RCU periods are much shorter then the chance of cache hotness of the
objects is increased.
--
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