Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 8 Oct 2013 09:34:47 -0700 | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/5] rcusync: introduce struct rcu_sync_ops |
| |
On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 05:33:25PM +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 10/08, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > > > I think Linus meant to have rcu_sync_{enter,exit} as inlines with a > > const enum argument for the gp_type. > > > > That said; yes that will generate better code, but also more code, and > > like Steven already argued performance isn't really an issue here since > > we're going to potentially sleep for a rather long time. > > Yes, I do not think that we should make them "inline". Plus we need the > non-inline rcu_sync_func() anyway.
Yep. Now if it was rcu_read_lock() rather than synchronize_rcu(), it would be different. ;-)
Thanx, Paul
> Thanks again for the last series you sent. > > Oleg. >
| |