[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52335935.1020307@linaro.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Sep 2013 11:28:05 -0700
From: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
CC: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
lttng-dev@...ts.lttng.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Introduce timekeeper latch synchronization
On 09/13/2013 11:20 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>
> This looks to me like interesting optimisation work that should be
> considered after the following question is answered: does the added
> update-side cost actually matter that much ?
Yea, fair enough. We can measure the cost first.
thanks
-john
--
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