Re: [PATCH 1/5] rcusync: introduce struct rcu_sync_ops

[Oleg Nesterov]

On 10/04, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> On Fri, Oct 04, 2013 at 12:38:37PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2013 at 12:30 PM, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > As all the rcu_synchronization() methods (on non UP) are quite
> > > expensive, I doubt that this optimization is worth anything.
> >
> > Maybe. It just annoys me, because afaik, the function that gets called
> > is always static per callsite.
>
> Yes, very much so indeed. Worst is that we have no users of the regular
> RCU and RCU_BH variants and only included them for completeness since
> the general operation is just as valid for those.

And personally I think we should keep type/ops for completeness anyway,
even if we do not have RCU and RCU_BH users. But perhaps we can kill
RCU_SYNC and RCU_BH_SYNC enums/entries until we have a user.

Oleg.

--
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/