From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Arjan van de Ven Subject: Re: Question about usage of RCU in the input layer Date: Fri, 20 Mar 2009 06:50:58 -0700 Message-ID: <20090320065058.65d01771@infradead.org> References: <20090318215812.15496a86@infradead.org> <20090319085628.GA6167@in.ibm.com> <20090319071841.63334eff@infradead.org> <20090320020750.GA6807@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20090319202032.4c971d92@infradead.org> <20090320044541.GE6807@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:51051 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751981AbZCTNuD (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Mar 2009 09:50:03 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090320044541.GE6807@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Sender: linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org To: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com Cc: dipankar@in.ibm.com, linux-input@vger.kernel.org, dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 19 Mar 2009 21:45:41 -0700 "Paul E. McKenney" wrote: > > single CPU is soooo last decade ;-) > > But seriously I no longer have systems that aren't dual core or SMT > > in some form... > > OK, I will ask the stupid question... > > Why not delay bringing up the non-boot CPUs until later in boot? that'd be throwing out the baby with the bathwater... I'm trying to use the other cpus to do some of the boot work (so that the total goes faster); not using the other cpus would be counter productive to that. (As is just sitting in synchronize_rcu() when the other cpu is working.. hence this discussion ;-) -- Arjan van de Ven Intel Open Source Technology Centre For development, discussion and tips for power savings, visit http://www.lesswatts.org