lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Aug]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v3 tip/core/rcu 1/9] rcu: Add call_rcu_tasks()
On Sat, Aug 09, 2014 at 06:29:24PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 09, 2014 at 08:24:00PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 09, 2014 at 08:19:20PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > How about we simply assume 'idle' code, as defined by the rcu idle hooks
> > > are safe? Why do we want to bend over backwards to cover this?
> >
> > The thing is, we already have the special rcu trace hooks for tracing
> > inside this rcu-idle section, so why go beyond this now?
>
> I have to defer to Steven and Masami on this one, but I would guess that
> they want the ability to trace the idle loop for the same reasons they
> stated earlier.

want want want, I want a damn pony but somehow I'm not getting one. Why
are they getting this?
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-08-10 10:21    [W:0.169 / U:0.528 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site