[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1300218499.2250.12.camel@laptop>
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 20:48:19 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Linux-mm <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Ananth N Mavinakayanahalli <ananth@...ibm.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Jim Keniston <jkenisto@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Roland McGrath <roland@...k.frob.com>,
SystemTap <systemtap@...rces.redhat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2.6.38-rc8-tip 4/20] 4: uprobes: Adding and remove a
uprobe in a rb tree.
On Tue, 2011-03-15 at 20:22 +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> I am not sure if its a good idea to walk the tree
> > as and when the tree is changing either because of a insertion or
> > deletion of a probe.
>
> I know that you cannot walk the tree lockless except you would use
> some rcu based container for your probes.
You can in fact combine a seqlock, rb-trees and RCU to do lockless
walks.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/10/20/160
and
https://lkml.org/lkml/2010/10/20/437
But doing that would be an optimization best done once we get all this
working nicely.
--
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