On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 07:42:26AM -0400, Rik van Riel wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2005, Greg KH wrote:
>
> > Internally, that routine takes the klist's lock, decrements the reference
> > count of the previous klist_node and increments the count of the next
> > klist_node. It then drops the lock and returns.
>
> Sacrificing performance for scalability has never been
> the right thing in the past. Why would it be right now?
This is not a performance critical piece of code at all. It's used to
walk devices and drivers and busses at device insertion and removal
time, and at module load and unload. All of which are not bottlenecks
in benchmarks :)
Now if people want to use this for performance critical stuff, that
would be a different story. But the odds that they would be doing this
with kobjects would be very slim...
thanks,
greg k-h
-
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]
