[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20180307175833.GF3918@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2018 09:58:33 -0800
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai+lkml@...il.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
jannh@...gle.com, bcrl@...ck.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
kent.overstreet@...il.com, security@...nel.org,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, kernel-team@...com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] RCU, workqueue: Implement rcu_work
On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 05:23:17PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 07, 2018 at 06:54:08AM -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > One downside of allowing RCU callback functions to sleep is that
> > one poorly written callback can block a bunch of other ones.
>
> Not to mention that we really want the RCU callbacks to be simple and
> short. Needing fancy things in the callback really should be the
> exception not the rule.
Very much agreed with that as well!
Besides, Tejun's queue_rcu_work() provides this functionality and
seems pretty straightforward to use.
Thanx, Paul
Powered by blists - more mailing lists