[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <878t5qabgx.fsf@yhuang-dev.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2018 13:43:10 +0800
From: "Huang\, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>
To: Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com>
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <kernel-team@....com>,
<peterz@...radead.org>, <mingo@...nel.org>,
<jiangshanlai@...il.com>, <josh@...htriplett.org>,
<rostedt@...dmis.org>, <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
<joel@...lfernandes.org>, <len.brown@...el.com>,
<glider@...gle.com>, <peter@...leysoftware.com>, <aik@...abs.ru>
Subject: Re: [QUESTION] llist: Comment releasing 'must delete' restriction before traversing
Byungchul Park <byungchul.park@....com> writes:
> I think rcu list also works well. But I decided to use llist because
> llist is simpler and has one less pointer.
>
> Just to be sure, let me explain my use case more:
>
> 1. Introduced a global list where single linked list is sufficient.
> 2. All operations I need is to add items and traverse the list.
> 3. Ensure the operations always happen within irq-disabled section.
> 4. I'm considering CONFIG_ARCH_HAVE_NMI_SAFE_CMPXCHG properly.
> 5. The list can be accessed by every CPU concurrently.
>
Can you provide more information about where is your use case? Is it a
kernel driver? Then it is better to submit the patch together with its
user.
And I have the similar concern as Steven Rostedt. That is, if you are
the only user forever, it's not necessary to change the common code.
Best Regards,
Huang, Ying
Powered by blists - more mailing lists