Re: [Lse-tech] Re: RFC: patch to allow lock-free traversal of lists with insertion

Rusty Russell (rusty@rustcorp.com.au)
Sun, 14 Oct 2001 07:19:54 +1000

In message <Pine.LNX.4.33.0110131015410.8707-100000@penguin.transmeta.com> you
write:
>
> (b) the whole notiong of "scheduling point" is a lot too fragile to be
> acceptable for important data structures. It breaks with the
> pre-emption patches on UP, and we've seen many times how hard it is
> for developers to notice even when there _is_ an explicit "end
> critical region now" kind of thing

Yeah, if you can't get locking right, you can't get RCU right. I've
shown you that using it in place of standard locking is simple: the
ONLY added issue is being careful not to screw readers while doing the
actual insert/delete.

Where, if anywhere, is this worth it? Good question: 3% on 4-way
dbench doesn't cut it in my book...

Rusty.

--
Premature optmztion is rt of all evl. --DK
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/