[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160209110815.749c9e26@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2016 11:08:15 -0500
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>
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, 9 Feb 2016 16:04:42 +0000
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com> wrote:
> > 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.
Oh, OK.
That's fine. I just didn't want you to think that the RT folks were
going to pull it in for mainline.
-- Steve
Powered by blists - more mailing lists