Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 2 Apr 2009 15:44:44 -0700 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] v3 RCU: the bloatwatch edition |
| |
On Fri, 3 Apr 2009 00:36:05 +0200 Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> > Andrew, what do you think?
I'm really struggling to see how the 900-odd bytes saved justifies creating (yet another) variant of core kernel machinery.
> A worry is yet another RCU variant - we already have 3.
That would make four?
I wonder if that was sane of us.
> A trick we could use would be to put it into Documentation/rcu/, > linked in via some clever Makefile magic and only usable if a > ultra-embedded developer does a build with something like > CONFIG_RCU_TINY=y. That way there's no real maintenance and testing > overhead. > > It _does_ have documentation value beyond the ~900 bytes: it's the > simplest and smallest possible still-working UP RCU implementation > so it would be easy to teach RCU concepts via that, gradually. >
hm.
| |