From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Paul E. McKenney" Subject: Re: Does anyone use CONFIG_TINY_PREEMPT_RCU? Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 09:08:04 -0800 Message-ID: <20121113170804.GA2489@linux.vnet.ibm.com> References: <20121113004906.GA10557@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20121113144620.GA27426@elliptictech.com> Reply-To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, mingo@elte.hu, laijs@cn.fujitsu.com, dipankar@in.ibm.com, akpm@linux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com, josh@joshtriplett.org, niv@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, rostedt@goodmis.org, Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu, dhowells@redhat.com, edumazet@google.com, darren@dvhart.com, fweisbec@gmail.com, sbw@mit.edu, patches@linaro.org To: Nick Bowler Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20121113144620.GA27426@elliptictech.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-rt-users.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 09:46:20AM -0500, Nick Bowler wrote: > On 2012-11-12 16:49 -0800, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > Hello! > > > > I know of people using TINY_RCU, TREE_RCU, and TREE_PREEMPT_RCU, but I > > have not heard of anyone using TINY_PREEMPT_RCU for whom TREE_PREEMPT_RCU > > was not a viable option (in contrast, the people running Linux on > > tiny-memmory systems typically use TINY_RCU). Of course, if no one > > really needs it, the proper thing to do is to remove it. > > > > So, if you need TINY_PREEMPT_RCU, please let me know. Otherwise, I will > > remove it, probably in the 3.9 timeframe. > > Yes, I use TINY_PREEMPT_RCU on my UP machines. It is, in fact, the only > option. Suppose that TREE_PREEMPT_RCU was available for !SMP && PREEMPT builds. Would that work for you? Thanx, Paul