From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Davide Libenzi <davidel@xmailserver.org>
Cc: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@tv-sign.ru>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
dipankar@in.ibm.com, josht@linux.vnet.ibm.com, tytso@us.ibm.com,
dvhltc@us.ibm.com, tglx@linutronix.de, a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl,
bunk@kernel.org, ego@in.ibm.com, srostedt@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 3/9] RCU: Preemptible RCU
Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2007 15:24:49 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071001222449.GA11367@linux.vnet.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710011249390.25942@alien.or.mcafeemobile.com>
On Mon, Oct 01, 2007 at 03:09:16PM -0700, Davide Libenzi wrote:
> On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>
> > That would indeed be one approach that CPU designers could take to
> > avoid being careless or sadistic. ;-)
>
> That'd be the easier (unique maybe) approach too for them, from an silicon
> complexity POV. Distinguishing between different CPUs stores once inside a
> shared store buffer, would require tagging them in some way. That'd defeat
> most of the pros of having a shared store buffer ;)
Tagging requires but one bit per entry. Depends on the workload -- if
lots of barriers, bursty stores and little sharing, tagging might win.
If lots of sharing, then your suggested approach might win.
Thanx, Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-10-01 22:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-09-10 18:30 [PATCH RFC 0/9] RCU: Preemptible RCU Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-10 18:32 ` [PATCH RFC 1/9] RCU: Split API to permit multiple RCU implementations Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-21 4:14 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-10 18:33 ` [PATCH RFC 2/9] RCU: Fix barriers Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-10 18:34 ` [PATCH RFC 3/9] RCU: Preemptible RCU Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-21 4:17 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-21 5:50 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-21 5:56 ` Dipankar Sarma
2007-09-21 14:40 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-21 15:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2007-09-21 22:06 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-21 22:31 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-21 22:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-21 23:23 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-21 23:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-22 0:26 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-22 1:15 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-22 1:53 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-22 3:15 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-22 4:07 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-21 15:20 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-21 23:03 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-22 0:32 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-22 1:19 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-22 1:43 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-22 2:56 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-22 4:10 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-23 17:38 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-09-24 0:15 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-26 15:13 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-09-27 15:46 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-28 14:47 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-09-28 18:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-30 16:31 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-09-30 23:02 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-10-01 1:37 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-10-01 18:44 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-10-01 19:21 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-10-01 22:09 ` Davide Libenzi
2007-10-01 22:24 ` Paul E. McKenney [this message]
2007-10-02 18:02 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-10-01 1:20 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-10 18:35 ` [PATCH RFC 4/9] RCU: synchronize_sched() workaround for CPU hotplug Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-10 18:36 ` [PATCH RFC 5/9] RCU: CPU hotplug support for preemptible RCU Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-30 16:38 ` Oleg Nesterov
2007-10-01 1:41 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-10 18:39 ` [PATCH RFC 6/9] RCU priority boosting " Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-28 22:56 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-09-28 23:05 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-09-30 3:11 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-10-05 11:46 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-10-05 12:24 ` Steven Rostedt
2007-10-05 13:21 ` Gautham R Shenoy
2007-10-05 14:07 ` Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-10 18:39 ` [PATCH RFC 7/9] RCU: rcutorture testing for RCU priority boosting Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-10 18:41 ` [PATCH RFC 8/9] RCU: Make RCU priority boosting consume less power Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-10 18:42 ` [PATCH RFC 9/9] RCU: preemptible documentation and comment cleanups Paul E. McKenney
2007-09-10 18:44 ` [PATCH RFC 0/9] RCU: Preemptible RCU Ingo Molnar
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=20071001222449.GA11367@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--to=paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=bunk@kernel.org \
--cc=davidel@xmailserver.org \
--cc=dipankar@in.ibm.com \
--cc=dvhltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=ego@in.ibm.com \
--cc=josht@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=oleg@tv-sign.ru \
--cc=srostedt@redhat.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tytso@us.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).