lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2012]   [Mar]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 5/6] implement per-cpu&per-domain state machine call_srcu()
From
Date
On Mon, 2012-03-12 at 11:32 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> And another question I should have asked to begin with... Would each
> VMA have its own SRCU domain, or are you thinking in terms of one
> SRCU domain for all VMAs globally?

The latter, single domain for all objects.

> If the latter, that pushes pretty strongly for per-CPU SRCU callback
> lists.

Agreed. I was under the impression the proposed thing had this, but on
looking at it again it does not. Shouldn't be hard to add though.

> Which brings up srcu_barrier() scalability (and yes, I am working
> on rcu_barrier() scalability). One way to handle this at least initially
> is to have srcu_barrier() avoid enqueueing callbacks on CPUs whose
> callback lists are empty. In addition, if the loop over all CPUs is
> preemptible, then there should not be much in the way of realtime issues.

Why do we have rcu_barrier() and how is it different from
synchronize_rcu()?



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2012-03-12 21:29    [W:0.116 / U:0.408 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site