From: Joel Fernandes <joel@joelfernandes.org>
To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, rostedt@goodmis.org,
byungchul.park@lge.com, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com,
Josh Triplett <josh@joshtriplett.org>,
Lai Jiangshan <jiangshanlai@gmail.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: kernel-team@android.com
Subject: Tasks RCU vs Preempt RCU
Date: Fri, 18 May 2018 11:36:23 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180518183623.GA163151@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com> (raw)
Hi,
I was thinking about tasks-RCU and why its needed. Since preempt-RCU allows
tasks to be preempted in read-sections, can we not just reuse that mechanism
for the trampolines since we track all preempted tasks so we would wait on
all tasks preempted within a trampoline?
I am trying to understand what will _not_ work if we did that.. I'm guessing
the answer is that that would mean the trampoline has to be wrapped with
rcu_read_{lock,unlock} which may add some overhead, but please let me know
if I'm missing something else..
The advantage I guess is possible elimination of an RCU variant, and also
possibly eliminating the tasks RCU thread that monitors.. Anyway I was
thinking more in terms of the effort of reduction of the RCU flavors etc and
reducing complexity ideas.
thanks!
- Joel
next reply other threads:[~2018-05-18 18:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-05-18 18:36 Joel Fernandes [this message]
2018-05-19 2:29 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-19 22:59 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-20 0:49 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-20 0:56 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-20 15:28 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-05-20 19:18 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-22 1:59 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-05-22 4:34 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-22 4:54 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-22 12:38 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-05-22 16:09 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-22 17:27 ` Steven Rostedt
2018-05-22 17:47 ` Paul E. McKenney
2018-05-23 1:19 ` Joel Fernandes
2018-05-23 3:10 ` Joel Fernandes
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20180518183623.GA163151@joelaf.mtv.corp.google.com \
--to=joel@joelfernandes.org \
--cc=byungchul.park@lge.com \
--cc=jiangshanlai@gmail.com \
--cc=josh@joshtriplett.org \
--cc=kernel-team@android.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®