[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131004153012.19245adb@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 15:30:12 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Paul McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>, Rik van Riel <riel@...hat.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@...hat.com>,
Johannes Weiner <hannes@...xchg.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] rcusync: introduce struct rcu_sync_ops
On Fri, 4 Oct 2013 12:12:25 -0700
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
> - together with using a few inline functions, suddenly the "indirect"
> jumps through this type descriptor end up actually being nice direct
> compile-time constants: iow, they get turned into direct jumps.
As all the rcu_synchronization() methods (on non UP) are quite
expensive, I doubt that this optimization is worth anything.
>
> Tadaa. You actually get good code generation, and you use *less*
> dynamic memory since you don't have to have this pointer to the
> descriptor.
Getting rid of the extra dynamic memory and the pointer business, on the
other hand, does make your suggestion worth doing.
-- Steve
--
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