[lkml]   [2001]   [Sep]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: 2.4.10pre7aa1
In article <> you wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Sep 2001 17:54:17 +0200
> Andrea Arcangeli <> wrote:
>> Only in 2.4.10pre7aa1: 00_rcu-1
>> wait_for_rcu and call_rcu implementation (from IBM). I did some
>> modifications with respect to the original version from IBM.
>> In particular I dropped the vmalloc_rcu/kmalloc_rcu, the
>> rcu_head must always be allocated in the data structures, it has
>> to be a field of a class, rather than hiding it in the allocation
>> and playing dirty and risky with casts on a bigger allocation.

> Hi Andrea,

> Like the kernel threads approach, but AFAICT it won't work for the case of two CPUs running wait_for_rcu at the same time (on a 4-way or above).

The patch I submitted to Andrea had logic to make sure that
two CPUs don't execute wait_for_rcu() at the same time.
Somehow it seems to have got lost in Andrea's modifications.

I will look at that and submit a new patch to Andrea, if necessary.

As for wrappers, I am agnostic. However, I think sooner or later
people will start asking for them, if we go by our past experience.

Dipankar Sarma <> Project:
Linux Technology Center, IBM Software Lab, Bangalore, India.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:03    [W:0.048 / U:0.116 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site