Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 29 May 2002 14:44:56 +1000 | From | Rusty Russell <> | Subject | Re: 8-CPU (SMP) #s for lockfree rtcache |
| |
On 28 May 2002 17:45:56 +0200 Andi Kleen <ak@muc.de> wrote:
> "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> writes: > > > From: Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@in.ibm.com> > > Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 18:28:06 +0530 > > > > Well, the last time RCU was discussed, Linus said that he would > > like to see someplace where RCU clearly helps. > > > > Alexey and I are in firm agreement that the routing cache > > clearly benefits from RCU. > > The next obvious benefitor IMHO is module unloading.
There is a much bigger question here, which is "are modules first class citizens"? Doing it properly turns us into a poor-man's microkernel. We would standardize our registration interfaces (similar to the standard notifier.h), and have them all do the inc and decs.
OTOH, if you treat module removal as a CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL thing, life becomes much much simpler.
I have the code, I'll be serious about it in ~2 months. Rusty. -- there are those who do and those who hang on and you don't see too many doers quoting their contemporaries. -- Larry McVoy - 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/
| |