From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mmu notifiers #v8
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 08:44:06 -0600
Message-ID: <20080304144406.GA25467@sgi.com>
References: <20080302155457.GK8091@v2.random>
	<20080303032934.GA3301@wotan.suse.de>
	<20080303125152.GS8091@v2.random>
	<20080303131017.GC13138@wotan.suse.de>
	<20080303151859.GA19374@sgi.com>
	<20080303165910.GA23998@wotan.suse.de>
	<20080303180605.GA3552@sgi.com>
	<20080303184517.GA4951@wotan.suse.de>
	<20080303191540.GB11156@sgi.com> <1204626932.6241.41.camel@lappy>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Nick Piggin <npiggin@suse.de>,
	Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@qumranet.com>, linux-mm@kvack.org,
	Kanoj Sarcar <kanojsarcar@yahoo.com>,
	Roland Dreier <rdreier@cisco.com>,
	Steve Wise <swise@opengridcomputing.com>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Avi Kivity <avi@qumranet.com>,
	kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, daniel.blueman@quadrics.com,
	Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>, general@lists.openfabrics.org,
	akpm@linux-foundation.org, Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Return-path: <kvm-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1204626932.6241.41.camel@lappy>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel>,
	<mailto:kvm-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=kvm-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>
List-Help: <mailto:kvm-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel>,
	<mailto:kvm-devel-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>
Sender: kvm-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net
Errors-To: kvm-devel-bounces@lists.sourceforge.net
List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org

On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 11:35:32AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 2008-03-03 at 13:15 -0600, Jack Steiner wrote:
> 
> > I haven't thought about locking requirements for the radix tree. Most accesses
> > would be read-only & updates infrequent. Any chance of an RCU-based radix
> > implementation?  Otherwise, don't we add the potential for hot locks/cachelines
> > for threaded applications ???
> 
> The current radix tree implementation in the kernel is RCU capable. We
> just don't have many RCU users yet.

Ahhh. You are right. I thought I looked but obviously missed it.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/