From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1751571AbbCSVri (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 19 Mar 2015 17:47:38 -0400
Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:57380 "EHLO
	mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1750776AbbCSVrf (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 19 Mar 2015 17:47:35 -0400
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2015 14:47:32 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, mingo@kernel.org,
        rusty@rustcorp.com.au, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, oleg@redhat.com,
        paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, torvalds@linux-foundation.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, andi@firstfloor.org, tglx@linutronix.de,
        Michel Lespinasse <walken@google.com>,
        Andrea Arcangeli <aarcange@redhat.com>,
        David Woodhouse <David.Woodhouse@intel.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/8] rbtree: Implement generic latch_tree
Message-Id: <20150319144732.e57f1e22f636e41d3721873c@linux-foundation.org>
In-Reply-To: <20150319173636.1bf2cde3@gandalf.local.home>
References: <20150318133626.526984618@infradead.org>
	<20150318134631.939369528@infradead.org>
	<20150318221446.14b0b04d.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
	<20150319072502.GR23123@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
	<20150319135833.5a844744936bd8fdafea7ed5@linux-foundation.org>
	<20150319173636.1bf2cde3@gandalf.local.home>
X-Mailer: Sylpheed 3.4.1 (GTK+ 2.24.23; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 17:36:36 -0400 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org> wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 13:58:33 -0700
> Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> 
> > OK.  This code is basically required to support perf/ftrace and
> > modules, yes?  Presumably small and space-constrained systems aren't
> > using either, so they don't take the hit.
> > 
> > However CONFIG_MODULES systems which aren't using perf/ftrace _do_ take
> > a hit.  How many systems are we talking here?  All non-x86?
> 
> Compromise... (Totally untested)
> 
> ...
>
> +config RBTREE_LATCH_INLINE
> +       def_bool y
> +       depends on PERF_EVENTS || TRACING

Should this be PERF_EVENTS, or PERF_EVENTS_NMI?

Could we just keep the old __module_address() for these configs?  It's
only 10 lines..