[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160209160442.GS22874@arm.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 16:04:42 +0000
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Yang Shi <yang.shi@...aro.org>, linaro-kernel@...ts.linaro.org,
linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org, catalin.marinas@....com,
bigeasy@...utronix.de, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: replace read_lock to rcu lock in call_step_hook
On Tue, Feb 09, 2016 at 10:07:58AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Feb 2016 14:54:26 +0000
> Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com> wrote:
>
>
> > Acked-by: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
>
> Will,
Hi Steve,
> The patch looks good to me. Do you want to take it through your tree?
>
> It benefits mainline too as a rcu_read_lock() is more efficient than
> rwlocks. Although I will say this is a slow path anyway.
I was thinking that Catalin would queue it for 4.6 in the arm64 tree,
since that's probably easiest in case any unlikely conflicts crop up.
Will
Powered by blists - more mailing lists