From: Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au>
To: george anzinger <george@mvista.com>
Cc: Dipankar Sarma <dipankar@sequent.com>,
nigel@nrg.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
mckenney@sequent.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preemptible kernel
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 22:32:13 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6732.985933933@ocs3.ocs-net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 28 Mar 2001 12:51:02 PST." <3AC24EB6.1F0DD551@mvista.com>
On Wed, 28 Mar 2001 12:51:02 -0800,
george anzinger <george@mvista.com> wrote:
>Dipankar Sarma wrote:
>> 1. Disable pre-emption during the time when references to data
>> structures
>> updated using such Two-phase updates are held.
>
>Doesn't this fly in the face of the whole Two-phase system? It seems to
>me that the point was to not require any locks. Preemption disable IS a
>lock. Not as strong as some, but a lock none the less.
The aim is to remove all module locks from the main kernel path and
move the penalty for module unloading into the task doing the unload.
Only the unload code needs to worry about preemption, not the main
kernel code paths, so main line code runs faster and scales better. I
don't care how long (within reason) it takes to unload a module, it is
such a rare event. I want module unload to be race free with zero
impact on the fast code paths, the current design penalizes the fast
code paths.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-03-30 6:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-03-15 1:25 [PATCH for 2.5] preemptible kernel Nigel Gamble
2001-03-17 17:34 ` Pavel Machek
2001-03-19 21:01 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-20 8:43 ` Rusty Russell
2001-03-20 9:32 ` Keith Owens
2001-03-21 0:48 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-21 1:23 ` Keith Owens
2001-03-21 3:35 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-21 8:04 ` george anzinger
2001-03-21 9:04 ` Keith Owens
2001-03-21 14:32 ` Rusty Russell
2001-03-23 20:42 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-28 11:47 ` Dipankar Sarma
2001-03-21 9:19 ` Keith Owens
2001-03-21 9:41 ` David S. Miller
2001-03-21 10:05 ` Andrew Morton
2001-03-22 0:20 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-21 10:57 ` george anzinger
2001-03-21 11:30 ` David S. Miller
2001-03-21 17:07 ` george anzinger
2001-03-21 18:18 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-21 22:25 ` Rusty Russell
2001-03-21 15:46 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-03-28 10:20 ` Dipankar Sarma
2001-03-28 20:51 ` george anzinger
2001-03-29 9:43 ` Dipankar Sarma
2001-03-30 6:32 ` Keith Owens [this message]
2001-03-21 0:24 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-30 0:26 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-30 20:11 ` Rusty Russell
2001-04-01 7:48 ` george anzinger
2001-04-01 21:13 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-04-02 19:56 ` george anzinger
2001-04-04 17:59 ` Rusty Russell
2001-04-01 21:07 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-04-04 17:51 ` Rusty Russell
2001-03-20 18:25 ` Roger Larsson
2001-03-20 22:06 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-20 22:27 ` george anzinger
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-04-06 23:52 Paul McKenney
2001-04-07 0:45 ` Andi Kleen
2001-04-07 1:25 Paul McKenney
2001-04-07 19:59 ` Rusty Russell
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=6732.985933933@ocs3.ocs-net \
--to=kaos@ocs.com.au \
--cc=dipankar@sequent.com \
--cc=george@mvista.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mckenney@sequent.com \
--cc=nigel@nrg.org \
/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