From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763975AbZEFWYl (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 May 2009 18:24:41 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1763941AbZEFWYJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 May 2009 18:24:09 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:43380 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1763921AbZEFWYI (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 May 2009 18:24:08 -0400 Organization: Red Hat UK Ltd. Registered Address: Red Hat UK Ltd, Amberley Place, 107-111 Peascod Street, Windsor, Berkshire, SI4 1TE, United Kingdom. Registered in England and Wales under Company Registration No. 3798903 From: David Howells In-Reply-To: <20090506112459.5edd0902.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <20090506112459.5edd0902.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20090502163423.GA1633@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <12234.1241558327@redhat.com> <20090506120909.GR25203@elte.hu> To: Andrew Morton Cc: dhowells@redhat.com, Ingo Molnar , paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, niv@us.ibm.com, dvhltc@us.ibm.com, lethal@linux-sh.org, kernel@wantstofly.org, matthew@wil.cx Subject: Re: [PATCH] v4 RCU: the bloatwatch edition Date: Wed, 06 May 2009 23:22:54 +0100 Message-ID: <11979.1241648574@redhat.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Andrew Morton wrote: > More like "concerns". It's unobvious to me that the modest .text > savings justify the costs of an additional RCU implementation. Where > those costs include It may be more than just modest .text savings. Being optimised to be as simple as possible, and to only support one CPU, it may be quicker too. I'm not sure how best to benchmark it though. David