From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH, RESEND] fs: push rcu_barrier() from
 deactivate_locked_super() to filesystems
Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 15:27:28 -0700
Message-ID: <CA+55aFw1yLOYzVCWMRUERNPEKgnrOfGNGmU335H_4aqGPLwq0Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1339191663-17693-1-git-send-email-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>
 <20120608150253.e42464a6.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20120608221446.GA18250@otc-wbsnb-06>
 <20120608222337.GR30000@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Return-path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date
         :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type;
        bh=ewqF7e5i02HERRjh/CsTYKUU0WVTcFL6fZi72XmQq6o=;
        b=pDOipVpfjd2BOWmq3/pI2X3Mc1OE9GfLZi/Poowcg8EFzifkqfQqoN1IgGcH6GRznQ
         wYDNdbwhbsTOOTFgf42VnE0rxlZ+YqxAMz+Z5KbPlEGuxULW1Zee/IWFySJsyPBm/IZN
         +TkrwGapCj0J4GNng7Emq7/6GzO6x4BybKzqhZDqvMrChSRSEm2Dd/3JxvlcIO74ogyl
         UEs0UFYMcCPotAYUlXAkC8lyv6/yXmpuU9MXmQNbqD1Jm7lXGKiQITNixs0DlZU034Nj
         wbQujRpWOmYoMdrE02vJqVo8AbA6CAKNxLs9eNhEnBlqQninVr69jdVd92sjVmskRwJh
         OiJA==
In-Reply-To: <20120608222337.GR30000@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-nilfs.vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" <kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com>, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>, Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@panasas.com>, Tao Ma <boyu.mt@taobao.com>, Nick Piggin <npiggin@kernel.dk>, "Dmitry V. Levin" <ldv@altlinux.org>, v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, samba-technical@lists.samba.org, codalist@telemann.coda.cs.cmu.edu, ecryptfs@vger.kernel.org, osd-dev@open-osd.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, jfs-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net, logfs@logfs.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-nilfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-ntfs-dev@lists.sourceforge.net, ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com, reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>
> Note that module unload is *not* a hot path - not on any even remotely sane
> use.

Actually, I think we've had distributions that basically did a "load
pretty much everything, and let God sort it out" approach to modules.
I know some people *have* actually worried about module load/unload
performance.

Whether it is "remotely sane" I'm not going to argue for, but ..

                Linus