From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753252AbdEFHQC (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 May 2017 03:16:02 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f48.google.com ([74.125.82.48]:36377 "EHLO mail-wm0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751027AbdEFHPz (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 May 2017 03:15:55 -0400 Date: Sat, 6 May 2017 09:15:51 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: "Paul E. McKenney" Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: FYI, tiny-kernel fix for rcu_segcblist separate .c file Message-ID: <20170506071551.owtodttlhwvjrtzp@gmail.com> References: <20170505161351.GH3956@linux.vnet.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170505161351.GH3956@linux.vnet.ibm.com> User-Agent: NeoMutt/20170113 (1.7.2) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Paul E. McKenney wrote: > Hello, Ingo, > > Just in case you get complaints about kernel size... > > In response to Linus's feedback, I did commit 98059b98619d ("rcu: > Separately compile large rcu_segcblist functions"), which of course > has the side-effect of bloating Tiny SRCU, which 0day Test Robot > complains about. > > So I have queued commit 7bf7fa5acc92 ("srcu: Apply trivial callback > lists to shrink Tiny SRCU"), which makes up for the bloating and then some. > > I don't believe that this debloating is at all urgent because people > building kernels for small-memory devices have to do a lot of other > tweaking, so that applying this additional commit as a patch should > not be too much incremental pain. > > So again, if you get complaints about 98059b98619d bloating tiny > kernel builds, 7bf7fa5acc92 is the fix. Ok! I do agree that it's not urgent: single CPU systems are rapidly becoming the exception for new hardware designed, even for embedded systems. At this point I think the educational value of TinyRCU is its main quality. Thanks, Ingo