[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150820182903.GA3161@worktop.event.rightround.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 20:29:03 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Kevin Hao <haokexin@...il.com>
Cc: Michael Ellerman <mpe@...erman.id.au>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] jump_label: no need to acquire the jump_label_mutex
in jump_lable_init()
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 08:14:29PM +0800, Kevin Hao wrote:
> The jump_label_init() run in a very early stage, even before the
> sched_init(). So there is no chance for concurrent access of the
> jump label table.
It also doesn't hurt to have it. Its better to be consistent and
conservative with locking unless there is a pressing need.
--
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