Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 12 May 2017 11:45:36 -0700 | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RFC tip/core/rcu] Make SRCU be once again optional |
| |
On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 11:41:55AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 05:10:40PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Fri, Apr 28, 2017 at 05:51:15PM -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > > On Fri, 28 Apr 2017, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > > > > > > Hello, Nicolas! > > > > > > > > Saw the TTY write up LWN and figured I should send this your way. > > > > It should be worth about 2K compared to current -next, which gave > > > > up the 2K compared to v4.10. So really getting things back to where > > > > they were. > > > > > > > > My current plan is to push this into v4.13. > > > > > > Excellent! > > > > > > If every maintainer finds a way to (optionally) reduce the size of the > > > code they maintain by 2K then we'll get a much smaller kernel pretty > > > soon. > > > > I would feel better if it wasn't me who had added the 2K, but then > > again, I do look forward to seeing a negative-sized kernel! ;-) > > And I am getting a lot of offlist pressure to remove both Tiny RCU and > Tiny SRCU. I am pushing back, but I might or might not prevail. In case > my pushback gets pushed back, do you have a -tiny tree or some such where > the code could go?
And adding Josh Triplett on CC, who I should have CCed to start with.
Thanx, Paul
| |