From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752736Ab0KEPHA (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Nov 2010 11:07:00 -0400 Received: from e9.ny.us.ibm.com ([32.97.182.139]:34117 "EHLO e9.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752201Ab0KEPG6 (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Nov 2010 11:06:58 -0400 Date: Fri, 5 Nov 2010 08:06:48 -0700 From: "Paul E. McKenney" To: Frederic Weisbecker Cc: mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, dhowells@redhat.com, loic.minier@linaro.org, dhaval.giani@gmail.com, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, josh@joshtriplett.org Subject: Re: dyntick-hpc and RCU Message-ID: <20101105150648.GB2850@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com References: <20101104232148.GA28037@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20101105052740.GB6698@nowhere> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Nov 05, 2010 at 06:38:17AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > 2010/11/5 Frederic Weisbecker : > > For now #3 seems to me more viable (with one of the adds I proposed). > > Doh, but I forgot it's not preemptable! So #2 looks then more viable. > Unless we can tweak #3 into getting it preemptable. There are ways of getting preemptiblity working. This might not be all that big a modification to TREE_PREEMPT_RCU, now that I think of it. Thanx, Paul