Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 10 Nov 2008 11:22:15 +0800 | From | Lai Jiangshan <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] rcupdate: move synchronize_sched() back to rcupdate.c V2 |
| |
Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Thu, Nov 06, 2008 at 02:47:44PM +0800, Lai Jiangshan wrote: >> this fix remove ugly macro, and increase readability for rcupdate codes >> >> changed from v1: >> use HAVE_SPECIAL_RCU_BH/SCHED instead of define duplicate version of >> synchronize_sched(). > > Hello, Jiangshan! > > I very much like getting rid of the ugly macro. I of course like the > kernel-doc fixes. ;-) > > I am not yet convinced of the HAVE_SPECIAL_RCU_BH and > HAVE_SPECIAL_RCU_SCHED pieces. It is not clear to me that this approach > is simpler than the current approach of simply providing the appropriate > definitions for the symbols in the implementation-specific rcuxxx.h > file. > > Am I missing something? > > Thanx, Paul >
I think:
RCU_BH is not required, we can used RCU instead. so HAVE_SPECIAL_RCU_BH will help for implementation which has not RCU_BH.
HAVE_SPECIAL_RCU_SCHED is a little different, RCU and RCU_SCHED are both required for the kernel. But I think, in an implementation, if rcu_read_lock_sched() implies rcu_read_lock(), we may not need implement RCU_SCHED too(sometimes we may implement RCU_SCHED for performance). so HAVE_SPECIAL_RCU_SCHED will help.
Thanx, Lai.
| |