On 7/6/07, pradeep singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
Quick question
the critical section between rcu_read_lock and rcu_read_unlock need to
be as small as possible like in case of local_irq_save()/restore or am
i at liberty to have a large critical section with rcu lock?
RCU read locks do not do any explicit locking, and do not block
readers OR writers. However, the associated memory cleanup is done
only *after* all CPUs have quiesced (went out of atomic context) at
least once. So you *might* be delaying that, but I dont see any harm
in doing somewhat more work while holding RCU read locks. They do
disable preemption - so latencies might suffer.
e.g
rcu_read_lock()
...
/* some code here */
...
rcu_read_unlock()
Is it ok to hold a rcu_read_lock across a large block of code?
My guess it is ok?
I need someone to correct me or point me where i am misunderstanding something.
Thanks
--psr
--
play the game
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send an email with
"unsubscribe kernelnewbies" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://kernelnewbies.org/FAQ
--
The box said "Requires Windows Vista or better." So I installed LINUX
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send an email with
"unsubscribe kernelnewbies" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://kernelnewbies.org/FAQ
