Re: [RFC PATCH 09/14] ring_buffer: Initialize completions statically in the benchmark

2015-09-04 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Fri, 4 Sep 2015 11:31:26 +0200 Petr Mladek wrote: > 1st scenario: > - > > CPU0 CPU1 > > ring_buffer_producer_thread() > wake_up_process(consumer); > wait_for_completion(&read_start); > > ring_buffer_consu

Re: [RFC PATCH 09/14] ring_buffer: Initialize completions statically in the benchmark

2015-09-04 Thread Petr Mladek
On Mon 2015-08-03 14:31:09, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 16:39:26 +0200 > Petr Mladek wrote: > > > It looks strange to initialize the completions repeatedly. > > > > This patch uses static initialization. It simplifies the code > > and even helps to get rid of two memory barriers.

Re: [RFC PATCH 09/14] ring_buffer: Initialize completions statically in the benchmark

2015-08-03 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Tue, 28 Jul 2015 16:39:26 +0200 Petr Mladek wrote: > It looks strange to initialize the completions repeatedly. > > This patch uses static initialization. It simplifies the code > and even helps to get rid of two memory barriers. There was a reason I did it this way and did not use static in

[RFC PATCH 09/14] ring_buffer: Initialize completions statically in the benchmark

2015-07-28 Thread Petr Mladek
It looks strange to initialize the completions repeatedly. This patch uses static initialization. It simplifies the code and even helps to get rid of two memory barriers. Signed-off-by: Petr Mladek --- kernel/trace/ring_buffer_benchmark.c | 12 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 10 d