Re: [PATCH] stack and rcu interaction bug in smp_call_function_mask()

!MAILaRCHIVE_VOTE_RePLACE
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
To: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@...>
Cc: Venki Pallipadi <venkatesh.pallipadi@...>, Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@...>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...>, <npiggin@...>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...>, <suresh.b.siddha@...>
Date: Monday, August 11, 2008 - 12:26 am

Nick Piggin wrote:

What if we went the other way and strictly used queue-per-cpu?  It means 
multicast would require multiple enqueueing operations, which is a bit 
heavy, but it does make dequeuing and lifetime management very simple...

    J
--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
Re: [PATCH] stack and rcu interaction bug in smp_call_functi..., Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Thu Aug 21, 4:50 pm)
Re: [PATCH] stack and rcu interaction bug in smp_call_functi..., Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Mon Aug 11, 12:26 am)
Re: [PATCH] stack and rcu interaction bug in smp_call_functi..., Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Mon Aug 11, 2:27 pm)
Re: [PATCH] stack and rcu interaction bug in smp_call_functi..., Arjan van de Ven, (Mon Aug 11, 12:34 am)
Re: [PATCH] stack and rcu interaction bug in smp_call_functi..., Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Mon Aug 11, 2:18 pm)
Re: [PATCH] stack and rcu interaction bug in smp_call_functi..., Jeremy Fitzhardinge, (Fri Aug 8, 10:17 pm)