Re: Does anyone use CONFIG_TINY_PREEMPT_RCU?

[Nick Bowler]

On 2012-11-13 13:19 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 12:56:54PM -0500, Nick Bowler wrote:
> > On 2012-11-13 09:08 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > Suppose that TREE_PREEMPT_RCU was available for !SMP && PREEMPT builds.
> > > Would that work for you?
> > 
> > To be honest I don't really know what the difference is, other than what
> > the help text says, which is:
> > 
> >   [TINY_PREEMPT_RCU] greatly reduces the memory footprint of RCU.
> >   
> > "Greatly reduced memory footprint" sounds pretty useful...
> 
> OK, so from your viewpoint, the only possible benefit is smaller
> memory?

Well, I have no idea.  If I was given the choice between TREE_PREEMPT_RCU
and TINY_PREEMPT_RCU, absent any information not in the description of
these options, I would choose TINY.  The description suggests that the
memory savings come at the expense of SMP support, which sounds like a
great tradeoff to make for a UP system.

> How much memory does your device have, if I may ask?

It's a (pretty old!) desktop.  I recently had to upgrade it to two
gigabytes due to unbearable thrashing with only one...

Cheers,
-- 
Nick Bowler, Elliptic Technologies (http://www.elliptictech.com/)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/