[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080830141001.GD7107@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2008 07:10:01 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, cl@...ux-foundation.org,
mingo@...e.hu, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, manfred@...orfullife.com,
dipankar@...ibm.com, josht@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, schamp@....com,
niv@...ibm.com, dvhltc@...ibm.com, ego@...ibm.com,
laijs@...fujitsu.com, rostedt@...dmis.org,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC, tip/core/rcu] v3 scalable classic RCU
implementation
On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 11:33:00AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-08-29 at 17:49 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > Some shortcomings:
> >
> > o Entering and leaving dynticks idle mode is a quiescent state,
> > but the current patch doesn't take advantage of this (noted
> > by Manfred). It appears that it should be possible to make
> > nmi_enter() and nmi_exit() provide an in_nmi(), which would make
> > it possible for rcu_irq_enter() and rcu_irq_exit() to figure
> > out whether it is safe to tell RCU about the quiescent state --
> > and also greatly simplify the code.
>
> Already done and available in the -tip tree, curtesy of Mathieu.
Very cool!!! I see one of his patches at http://lkml.org/lkml/2008/4/17/342,
but how do I find out which branch of -tip this is on? (I am learning
git, but it is a slow process...)
This would also simplify preemptable RCU's dyntick interface, removing
the need for proofs.
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