Re: [PATCH RFC] Priority boosting for preemptible RCU
From: Gautham R Shenoy <hidden>
Date: 2007-08-24 08:21:55
Also in:
lkml
On Thu, Aug 23, 2007 at 08:55:26AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
quoted
Even if we use another cpumask_t, whenever a cpu goes down or comes up, that will be reflected in this map, no? So what's the additional advantage of using it?The additional map allows the code to use something other than the lock_cpu_hotplug/unlock_cpu_hotplug, and also is robust against any changes to the hotplug synchronization mechanism. Might well be better just to use the current hotplug synchronization mechanism, but I was feeling paranoid. ;-)
If it was doing something more complicated in the critical section other than summing stuff up, I would probably recommend going for another map instead of using the current hotplug synchronization. But for this case the current hotplug synchronization would work just fine. I can very well understand your paranoia, but let me assure you, you are not the only one ;-) Regards gautham.
Thanx, Paul
-- Gautham R Shenoy Linux Technology Center IBM India. "Freedom comes with a price tag of responsibility, which is still a bargain, because Freedom is priceless!"