Re: [PATCH] move put_task_struct() reaping into a thread [Re: 2.6.18-rt1]

[Ingo Molnar]

* Esben Nielsen <nielsen.esben@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> The whole point is to defer those frees to a task. In -rt call_rcu() 
> is abused to do that in the case of put_task_struct(). But it is abuse 
> since call_rcu() is much more resourcefull than simply defering to a 
> task.

nah, it's not nearly as "resourceful" as having a separate thread for 
each teardown type ... It is also the easiest to maintain way of tearing 
down stuff, so i'm quite happy with it. If then i'll move the mm_struct 
teardown to RCU too. (Later on we can do some 'fastpath RCU' thing 
perhaps, to force an RCU batch of work through quiescent state)

but this is quite likely a side-issue that probably has no connection to 
the crash Bill was seeing. Whether separate teardown thread or 
softirq-rcu, it's a separate thread already.

	Ingo
-
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/