On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 11:04:33PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 01:58:33PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > OK. This code is basically required to support perf/ftrace and
> > modules, yes? Presumably small and space-constrained systems aren't
> > using either, so they don
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 05:36:36PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 13:58:33 -0700
> Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > OK. This code is basically required to support perf/ftrace and
> > modules, yes? Presumably small and space-constrained systems aren't
> > using either, so they don'
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 01:58:33PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 08:25:02 +0100 Peter Zijlstra
> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 10:14:46PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > > On Wed, 18 Mar 2015 14:36:32 +0100 Peter Zijlstra
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > include/linux/rb
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 01:58:33PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> OK. This code is basically required to support perf/ftrace and
> modules, yes? Presumably small and space-constrained systems aren't
> using either, so they don't take the hit.
>
> However CONFIG_MODULES systems which aren't using
On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 14:47:32 -0700
Andrew Morton wrote:
> Should this be PERF_EVENTS, or PERF_EVENTS_NMI?
No idea. I just whipped up a quick patch and guessed at the configs.
I was trying to show other options for the solution more than to show a
working patch ;-)
>
> Could we just keep the o
On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 17:36:36 -0400 Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 13:58:33 -0700
> Andrew Morton wrote:
>
> > OK. This code is basically required to support perf/ftrace and
> > modules, yes? Presumably small and space-constrained systems aren't
> > using either, so they don't tak
On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 17:36:36 -0400
Steven Rostedt wrote:
> diff --git a/lib/rbtree_latch.c b/lib/rbtree_latch.c
> new file mode 100644
> index ..13867da4f27f
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/lib/rbtree_latch.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,5 @@
> +
> +#ifndef CONFIG_RBTREE_LATCH_INLINE
> +#define RBTREE_LATCH_
On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 13:58:33 -0700
Andrew Morton wrote:
> OK. This code is basically required to support perf/ftrace and
> modules, yes? Presumably small and space-constrained systems aren't
> using either, so they don't take the hit.
>
> However CONFIG_MODULES systems which aren't using perf/
On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 08:25:02 +0100 Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 10:14:46PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > On Wed, 18 Mar 2015 14:36:32 +0100 Peter Zijlstra
> > wrote:
> >
> > > include/linux/rbtree_latch.h | 223
> > > +++
> >
> >
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 10:14:46PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Mar 2015 14:36:32 +0100 Peter Zijlstra
> wrote:
>
> > include/linux/rbtree_latch.h | 223
> > +++
>
> Did it really need to all be inlined?
Without that you get actual function
On Wed, 18 Mar 2015 14:36:32 +0100 Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> include/linux/rbtree_latch.h | 223
> +++
Did it really need to all be inlined?
How much of this code is unneeded on uniprocessor?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe li
* Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Implement a latched RB-tree in order to get unconditional RCU/lockless
> lookups.
Two very minor nits:
> +struct latch_tree_node {
> + /*
> + * Because we have an array of two entries in struct latch_tree_nodes
> + * its not possible to use container_of(
Implement a latched RB-tree in order to get unconditional RCU/lockless
lookups.
Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers
Cc: "Paul E. McKenney"
Cc: Oleg Nesterov
Cc: Michel Lespinasse
Cc: Andrea Arcangeli
Cc: David Woodhouse
Cc: Rik van Riel
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel)
---
include/linux/rbtree_lat
13 matches
Mail list logo
