[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230316004227.GJ860405@mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2023 20:42:27 -0400
From: "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Uladzislau Rezki <urezki@...il.com>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, RCU <rcu@...r.kernel.org>,
"Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
Oleksiy Avramchenko <oleksiy.avramchenko@...y.com>,
Philipp Reisner <philipp.reisner@...bit.com>,
Bryan Tan <bryantan@...are.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Bob Pearson <rpearsonhpe@...il.com>,
Ariel Levkovich <lariel@...dia.com>,
Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] Rename k[v]free_rcu() single argument to
k[v]free_rcu_mightsleep()
On Wed, Mar 15, 2023 at 03:34:48PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> Still, I will replace that code back to a kfree() and rcu_synchonize() than
> to let that other name get in.
That will have a performance hit relaive to kfree_rcu_mightsleep().
If that's OK with you, sure, you can do that.
Personally, I don't have a lot of problem with that name, which is why
I ack'ed the change for ext4.
- Ted
Powered by blists - more mailing lists