From: Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
niv@us.ibm.com, dvhltc@us.ibm.com, dhowells@redhat.com,
lethal@linux-sh.org, kernel@wantstofly.org, matthew@wil.cx
Subject: Re: [PATCH] v3 RCU: the bloatwatch edition
Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 15:44:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090402154444.b143efcf.akpm@linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090402223605.GB19007@elte.hu>
On Fri, 3 Apr 2009 00:36:05 +0200
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
>
> Andrew, what do you think?
I'm really struggling to see how the 900-odd bytes saved justifies
creating (yet another) variant of core kernel machinery.
> A worry is yet another RCU variant - we already have 3.
That would make four?
I wonder if that was sane of us.
> A trick we could use would be to put it into Documentation/rcu/,
> linked in via some clever Makefile magic and only usable if a
> ultra-embedded developer does a build with something like
> CONFIG_RCU_TINY=y. That way there's no real maintenance and testing
> overhead.
>
> It _does_ have documentation value beyond the ~900 bytes: it's the
> simplest and smallest possible still-working UP RCU implementation
> so it would be easy to teach RCU concepts via that, gradually.
>
hm.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-04-02 22:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-02-03 18:34 [PATCH] v2 RCU: the bloatwatch edition Paul E. McKenney
2009-03-29 20:31 ` [PATCH] v3 " Paul E. McKenney
2009-04-02 22:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-02 22:44 ` Andrew Morton [this message]
2009-04-03 0:02 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-04-03 6:52 ` Andi Kleen
2009-04-03 10:45 ` Lennert Buytenhek
2009-04-02 22:44 ` Paul Mundt
2009-04-08 16:38 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-04-08 16:55 ` Paul Mundt
2009-04-08 18:44 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-04-28 14:24 ` David Howells
2009-04-28 19:45 ` Paul E. McKenney
2009-04-28 21:39 ` David Howells
2009-04-29 0:57 ` Paul E. McKenney
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=20090402154444.b143efcf.akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--to=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=dvhltc@us.ibm.com \
--cc=kernel@wantstofly.org \
--cc=lethal@linux-sh.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=matthew@wil.cx \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=niv@us.ibm.com \
--cc=paulmck@linux.vnet.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