* Steven Rostedt <[email protected]> wrote:
> > i think the 'migrate read-count' method is not adequate either, because
> > all callbacks queued within an RCU read section must be called after the
> > lock has been dropped - while with the migration method CPU#1 would be
> > free to process callbacks queued in the RCU read section still active on
> > CPU#2.
>
> Although you can't disable preemption for the duration of the
> rcu_readlock, what about pinning the process to a CPU while it has the
> lock. Would this help solve the migration issue?
yes, but that's rather gross. PREEMPT_BKL was opposed by Linus precisely
because it used such a method - once that was fixed, PREEMPT_BKL got
accepted. It also limits the execution flow quite much. I'd rather not
do it if there's any other method.
Ingo
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
