Re: Re-tune x86 uaccess code for PREEMPT

From:		"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa-AT-zytor.com>
To:		Andi Kleen <andi-AT-firstfloor.org>
Subject:		Re: Re-tune x86 uaccess code for PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY
Date:		Fri, 09 Aug 2013 21:42:35 -0700
Message-ID:		<5205C4BB.6020003@zytor.com>
Cc:		linux-kernel-AT-vger.kernel.org, x86-AT-kernel.org, mingo-AT-kernel.org, torvalds-AT-linux-foundation.org
Archive-link:		Article, Thread

On 08/09/2013 04:04 PM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> 
> This patch kit is an attempt to get us back to sane code, 
> mostly by doing proper inlining and doing sleep checks in the right
> place. Unfortunately I had to add one tree sweep to avoid an nasty
> include loop.
> 
> It costs a bit of text space, but I think it's worth it
> (if only to keep my blood pressure down while reading ftrace logs...)
> 

Looks nice at first glance.

Now, here is a bigger question: shouldn't we be deprecating/getting rid
of PREEMPT_VOUNTARY in favor of PREEMPT?

	-hpa

(Log in to post comments)

Re: Re-tune x86 uaccess code for PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY