lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Mar]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateFri, 18 Mar 2005 16:58:44 +0100
FromIngo Molnar <>
SubjectRe: Real-Time Preemption and RCU
* Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@us.ibm.com> wrote:

> > > 		preempt_disable();
> > > 		if (current->rcu_read_lock_nesting++ == 0) {
> > > 			current->rcu_read_lock_ptr =
> > > 				&__get_cpu_var(rcu_data).lock;
> > > 			read_lock(current->rcu_read_lock_ptr);
> > > 		}
> > > 		preempt_enable();

> My current thought is that the preempt_disable()/preempt_enable() can
> be dropped entirely.  Messes up any tool that browses through
> ->rcu_read_lock_nesting, but don't see any other problem.  Yet,
> anyway!

yeah - this sounds good. (We are not aiming for irq-safe RCU anyway, on
PREEMPT_RT.)

	Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:11    [from the cache]
©2003-2008