Re: [PATCH] Optimize struct task_delay_info

[Frank Ch. Eigler]

"Zhang, Yanmin" <yanmin_zhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> [...]
> > > 2) Delete lock. [..]
> > > In addition, the result is for performance data collection, so it's
> > > unnecessary to add such lock.
> > Not sure that's a good idea. People expect their performance counts
> > to be accurate too. [...]
> [...]
> 2) If the reader could get the correct data when the process updates
> the data. It might be an issue. But the issue is not
> important. Mostly, the application tool reads the data in an
> interval.

Can you elaborate on that some more?  Is it OK for the sample
monitoring program to return inconsistent data sometimes?  Is there
reason to believe that this sample user-space program will remain the
sole consumer of this data?  Might a seqlock be appropriate here?

- FChE
-
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/