Re: [RFC] dynticks: dynticks_idle is only modified locally use this_cpu ops

[Christoph Lameter]

On Tue, 2 Sep 2014, Paul E. McKenney wrote:

> Yep, these two have been on my "when I am feeling insanely gutsy" list
> for quite some time.
>
> But I have to ask...  On x86, is a pair of mfence instructions really
> cheaper than an atomic increment?

Not sure why you would need an mfence instruction?

> > If the first patch I send gets merged then a lot of other this_cpu related
> > optimizations become possible regardless of the ones in the RFC.
>
> Yep, I am queuing that one.

Great.

> But could you please do future patches against the rcu/dev branch of
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/paulmck/linux-rcu.git?
> I had to hand-apply due to conflicts.  Please see below for my version,
> and please check to make sure that I didn't mess something up in the
> translation.

Looks ok. Will use the correct tree next time.


--
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/