From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
dipankar@in.ibm.com, josht@linux.vnet.ibm.com, tytso@us.ibm.com,
dvhltc@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl,
bunk@kernel.org, ego@in.ibm.com, srostedt@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 3/9] RCU: Preemptible RCU
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 15:24:49 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071001222449.GA11367@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710011249390.25942@alien.or.mcafeemobile.com>
On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 03:09:16PM -0700, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > That would indeed be one approach that CPU designers could take to
> > avoid being careless or sadistic. ;-)
>
> That'd be the easier (unique maybe) approach too for them, from an silicon
> complexity POV. Distinguishing between different CPUs stores once inside a
> shared store buffer, would require tagging them in some way. That'd defeat
> most of the pros of having a shared store buffer ;)
Tagging requires but one bit per entry. Depends on the workload -- if
lots of barriers, bursty stores and little sharing, tagging might win.
If lots of sharing, then your suggested approach might win.
Thanx, Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-01 22:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-09-10 18:30 [PATCH RFC 0/9] RCU: Preemptible RCU Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-10 18:32 ` [PATCH RFC 1/9] RCU: Split API to permit multiple RCU implementations Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-21 4:14 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-10 18:33 ` [PATCH RFC 2/9] RCU: Fix barriers Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-10 18:34 ` [PATCH RFC 3/9] RCU: Preemptible RCU Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-21 4:17 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-21 5:50 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-21 5:56 ` Dipankar Sarma
2007-09-21 14:40 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-21 15:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-09-21 22:06 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-21 22:31 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-21 22:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-21 23:23 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-21 23:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-22 0:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-22 1:15 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-22 1:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-22 3:15 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-22 4:07 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-21 15:20 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-21 23:03 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-22 0:32 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-22 1:19 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-22 1:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-22 2:56 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-22 4:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-23 17:38 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-09-24 0:15 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-26 15:13 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-09-27 15:46 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-28 14:47 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-09-28 18:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-30 16:31 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-09-30 23:02 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-10-01 1:37 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-10-01 18:44 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-10-01 19:21 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-10-01 22:09 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-10-01 22:24 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2007-10-02 18:02 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-10-01 1:20 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-10 18:35 ` [PATCH RFC 4/9] RCU: synchronize_sched() workaround for CPU hotplug Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-10 18:36 ` [PATCH RFC 5/9] RCU: CPU hotplug support for preemptible RCU Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-30 16:38 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-10-01 1:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-10 18:39 ` [PATCH RFC 6/9] RCU priority boosting " Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-28 22:56 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-09-28 23:05 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-30 3:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-10-05 11:46 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-10-05 12:24 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-10-05 13:21 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-10-05 14:07 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-10 18:39 ` [PATCH RFC 7/9] RCU: rcutorture testing for RCU priority boosting Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-10 18:41 ` [PATCH RFC 8/9] RCU: Make RCU priority boosting consume less power Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-10 18:42 ` [PATCH RFC 9/9] RCU: preemptible documentation and comment cleanups Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-10 18:44 ` [PATCH RFC 0/9] RCU: Preemptible RCU Ingo Molnar
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=20071001222449.GA11367@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bunk@kernel.org \
--cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dvhltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
--cc=josht@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=srostedt@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tytso@us.ibm.com \
/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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.