[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CALAqxLU3M5BU_nS6wbnw4CRSY3g-59N3Wj6xxwsjHm095WjVCA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 08:20:07 -0700
From: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Paweł Moll <pawel.moll@....com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...il.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Sonny Rao <sonnyrao@...omium.org>,
"ak@...ux.intel.com" <ak@...ux.intel.com>, vincent.weaver@...ne.edu
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/4] Another go at ktime_get_raw_fast_ns()
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 2:31 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> Hi John,
>
> So yeah, I just didn't try hard enough it seems; how about this?
Yea, this looks much better! I'll queue it up for testing and if that
goes well include it for 4.1.
> Also, I think we should double check that everything passed to
> tk_setup_internals(.clock) is either static storage or RCU-sched freed,
> because with the whole latch thing one CPUs (fast) access might still be
> in progress while the other is freeing the clock struct.
>
> Not sure what the lifetime rules of struct clocksource are here.
At one point it was install and never remove, but I think Thomas
changed that awhile back, so I think your concern here is a good one.
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