Urs,
On Sat, 2006-07-01 at 07:58 +0200, Urs Thuermann wrote:
> So my question is, is it really necessary for the list traversal to be
> atomic, i.e. to disable preemption? According to "Linux Device
> Drivers", this is needed for the callback function, so it can be
> called after the scheduler has been run on all CPUs and no reader is
> still accessing the list item to be freed. Is it right, that the
> rcu_read_lock() wouldn't be necessary if I only would call
> list_add_rcu() and list_del_rcu() since these make atomic changes and
> can run in parallel anyway, even with rcu_read_lock(), on a SMP
> system?
Does Documentation/listRCU.txt answer your questions ?
tglx
-
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]
