On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 04:32:11PM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > This series takes advantage of callback numbering to simplify RCU's > grace-period machinery, in some cases also reducing the number of > lock acquisitions (though the resulting change in performance is not > perceptible). The individual patches are as follows: > > 1. Move code to make way for the code-combining in later patches. > This commit makes no changes, just moves code. > > 2. Make __note_new_gpnum() also check for the ends of prior grace > periods, thus eliminating the earlier possibility of a given > CPU becoming aware of the start of the next grace period before > becoming aware of the end of the previous grace period. Yes, > the code did handle this correctly, but now it doesn't need to. > More important, now I don't need to think about how it handles > this correctly. > > 3. Rename note_new_gpnum() to note_gp_changes() in preparation for > later merge of rcu_process_gp_end() into this function. > > 4. Change calls to rcu_process_gp_end() to instead call > note_gp_changes(), and also remove the now-used rcu_process_gp_end(). > > 5. Remove duplicate code by merging __rcu_process_gp_end() into > __note_gp_changes(). > > 6. Eliminate now-redundant call to check_for_new_grace_period(). This > leaves only a single caller, so inline check_for_new_grace_period(). > > 7. Given that rcu_start_gp_per_cpu() is a trivial wrapper function > with only one caller, inline it into its sole remaining call site. > > 8. Eliminate now-redundant call to note_gp_changes().
For all 8: Reviewed-by: Josh Triplett <j...@joshtriplett.org> -- 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/
