From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 29 May 2002 00:42:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 29 May 2002 00:42:44 -0400 Received: from ausmtp02.au.ibm.COM ([202.135.136.105]:34013 "EHLO ausmtp02.au.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 29 May 2002 00:42:44 -0400 Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 14:44:56 +1000 From: Rusty Russell To: Andi Kleen Cc: davem@redhat.com, torvalds@transmeta.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, paul.mckenney@us.ibm.com, andrea@suse.de Subject: Re: 8-CPU (SMP) #s for lockfree rtcache Message-Id: <20020529144456.52c1bc1d.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.7.4 (GTK+ 1.2.10; powerpc-debian-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 28 May 2002 17:45:56 +0200 Andi Kleen wrote: > "David S. Miller" writes: > > > From: Dipankar Sarma > > Date: Tue, 28 May 2002 18:28:06 +0530 > > > > Well, the last time RCU was discussed, Linus said that he would > > like to see someplace where RCU clearly helps. > > > > Alexey and I are in firm agreement that the routing cache > > clearly benefits from RCU. > > The next obvious benefitor IMHO is module unloading. There is a much bigger question here, which is "are modules first class citizens"? Doing it properly turns us into a poor-man's microkernel. We would standardize our registration interfaces (similar to the standard notifier.h), and have them all do the inc and decs. OTOH, if you treat module removal as a CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL thing, life becomes much much simpler. I have the code, I'll be serious about it in ~2 months. Rusty. -- there are those who do and those who hang on and you don't see too many doers quoting their contemporaries. -- Larry McVoy