From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933108Ab2CZSxd (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Mar 2012 14:53:33 -0400 Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:21506 "EHLO hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932749Ab2CZSxc (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Mar 2012 14:53:32 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=2.0 cv=P4S4d18u c=1 sm=0 a=ZycB6UtQUfgMyuk2+PxD7w==:17 a=XQbtiDEiEegA:10 a=NFM--E4xPHYA:10 a=5SG0PmZfjMsA:10 a=Q9fys5e9bTEA:10 a=m3rNscxq_2rgUerDx74A:9 a=PUjeQqilurYA:10 a=ZycB6UtQUfgMyuk2+PxD7w==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 74.67.80.29 Message-ID: <1332788008.23924.114.camel@gandalf.stny.rr.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] rcu: Make __rcu_read_lock() inlinable From: Steven Rostedt To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: Peter Zijlstra , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, josh@joshtriplett.org, niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, dhowells@redhat.com, eric.dumazet@gmail.com, darren@dvhart.com, fweisbec@gmail.com, patches@linaro.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2012 14:53:28 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20120326183232.GK2450@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20120325205249.GA29528@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1332748484.16159.61.camel@twins> <20120326183232.GK2450@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-15" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 11:32 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > Preemption is disabled at this point, correct? > Is this a philosophical question? You're asking if preemption is disabled while a task is currently being preempted ;-) -- Steve