lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: SRCU: Number of outstanding callbacks
Date
Paul E. McKenney <paulmck <at> linux.vnet.ibm.com> writes:

> The short answer is, as you guessed, because it is not (yet) worth doing.
> This is at least in part because SRCU is not heavily used.
>
> The philosophy behind the limitation is that the memory overhead of
> the blocks is a small fraction of the memory required to represent
> a thread. As you say, there are a number of other strategies that can
> be pursued, but the current strategy has the advantage of simplicity.
> In particular, the current strategy does not require a failure return
> from an as-yet-nonexistent call_srcu(). Handling such a failure return
> is certainly possible, but someone would have to show me an extremely
> good reason for putting up with this.


Yes, I've noticed the extreme simplicity of the current synchronize_srcu().
As for failure return from call_srcu(), I think it's possible to just call
synchronize_srcu() from inside call_srcu() if the latter encounters any errors.
Anyway call_srcu() will be "sometimes blocking" because of the limit on number
of outstanding callbacks, so this must not be a problem.


--
Best regards,
Dmitriy V'jukov



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-03-11 18:17    [W:0.029 / U:0.528 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site