[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170419145214.y4in7mjfyhu33bpt@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Apr 2017 16:52:15 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...nel.org,
jiangshanlai@...il.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
josh@...htriplett.org, tglx@...utronix.de, rostedt@...dmis.org,
dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, dvhart@...ux.intel.com,
fweisbec@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com, bobby.prani@...il.com,
marc.zyngier@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 tip/core/rcu 0/13] Miscellaneous fixes for 4.12
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 07:47:30AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> The RCU expedited primitives have been completely rewritten since then,
> and no longer use try_stop_cpus(), no longer disturb idle CPUs, and no
> longer disturb nohz_full CPUs running in userspace. In addition, there
> is the rcupdate.rcu_normal kernel boot paramter for those who want to
> completely avoid RCU expedited primitives.
>
> So it seems to me to be time for the patch below. Thoughts?
So I forgot all the details again; but if I'm not mistaken it still
prods CPUs with IPIs (just not idle/nohz_full CPUs). So its still not
ideal to sprinkle them around.
Which would still argue against using them too much.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists