On Thu, Sep 06, 2012 at 09:52:53AM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-09-06 at 15:46 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, 2012-08-30 at 11:18 -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > + get_online_cpus();
> > > + for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> > > + for_each_rcu_flavor(rsp)
> > > + smp_call_function_single(cpu, rcu_oom_notify_cpu,
> > > + rsp, 1);
> > > + put_online_cpus();
> >
> > I guess blasting IPIs around is better than OOM but still.. do you
> > really need to wait for each cpu individually, or would a construct
> > using on_each_cpu() be possible, or better yet, on_each_cpu_cond()?
I rejected on_each_cpu_cond() because it disables preemption across
a scan of all CPUs. Probably need to fix that at some point...
> Also, what about having the rcu_oom_notify_cpu handler do the
> for_each_rcu_flavor() and not send an IPI multiple times to a single
> CPU?
Fair enough!
Thanx, Paul
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
