[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1409021545370.32690@gentwo.org>
Date:	Tue, 2 Sep 2014 15:47:55 -0500 (CDT)
From:	Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To:	"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
cc:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] dynticks: dynticks_idle is only modified locally use
 this_cpu ops
On Tue, 2 Sep 2014, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> But yes, in theory, something like this can work if appropriate memory
> barriers are put in place.  In practice, this sort of change needs
> profound testing on multiple architectures.
Ok how can we move forward? I just looked further and it seems a similar
approach could perhaps work for the dynticks field.
If the first patch I send gets merged then a lot of other this_cpu related
optimizations become possible regardless of the ones in the RFC.
--
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
 
