[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1388559142.60584.1460820549723.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2016 15:29:09 +0000 (UTC)
From: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, josh@...htriplett.org,
rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@...il.com>, mingo@...hat.com
Subject: Re: Isolated expedited RCU code to a new tree_exp.h
----- On Apr 16, 2016, at 9:08 AM, Frederic Weisbecker fweisbec@...il.com wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 15, 2016 at 04:52:02PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> Hello, Frederic,
>>
>> One thing that I have had on my list for some time is to rearrange the
>> RCU source code to make it easier to find things. Given our discussion
>> yesterday, this seemed like a good time to take that step with the
>> expedited grace-period code. I have a couple of commits doing this in
>> -rcu, and would like your opinion. Worthwhile, or should I revert those
>> two commits?
>
> It's definetly worth having a look! And it might help me eventually understand
> that expedited grace period thing :-)
Moving the expedited handling into its own files indeed
seems to better organize the sub-parts of RCU. That seems
like a good idea.
Thanks,
Mathieu
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
Powered by blists - more mailing lists