From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: mingo@elte.hu, dhowells@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
niv@us.ibm.com, dvhltc@us.ibm.com, lethal@linux-sh.org,
kernel@wantstofly.org, matthew@wil.cx
Subject: Re: [PATCH] v4 RCU: the bloatwatch edition
Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 12:19:08 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090506121908.1fcd3afc.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090506190216.GE6771@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Wed, 6 May 2009 12:02:16 -0700
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > > i'm wondering what Andrew thinks - he had objections, right?
> > >
> >
> > More like "concerns". It's unobvious to me that the modest .text
> > savings justify the costs of an additional RCU implementation. Where
> > those costs include
> >
> > - additional maintenance work and
> >
> > - the reduced code reliability which comes from fragmenting the
> > tester base. This will mostly affect users of the less popular RCU
> > implementations.
> >
> > But hey, maybe I'm wrong. And maybe I'm right, but we'll merge it anyway ;)
>
> ;-)
>
> How about if acceptance of Tiny RCU happens at the same time as Classic
> RCU is dropped? That would be a large net decrease in code size and
> complexity.
It's a bit artificial to link the two actions. Removing something:
good. Adding something: bad. good+bad == less good ;)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-05-06 19:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-05-02 16:34 [PATCH] v4 RCU: the bloatwatch edition Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-05 21:18 ` David Howells
2009-05-06 12:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-05-06 18:24 ` Andrew Morton
2009-05-06 19:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-06 19:19 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2009-05-06 20:20 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-05-06 22:22 ` David Howells
2009-05-06 22:51 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-22 11:43 ` David Howells
2009-06-22 12:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-22 15:29 ` Andrew Morton
2009-06-22 16:07 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-22 16:15 ` David Howells
2009-06-22 18:09 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-22 16:30 ` Darren Hart
2009-06-22 17:08 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-06-23 9:48 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-23 12:59 ` Paul E. McKenney
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20090506121908.1fcd3afc.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dvhltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=kernel@wantstofly.org \
--cc=lethal@linux-sh.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.