[ltt-dev] [RFC PATCH 0/7] priority-boost urcu

Paolo Bonzini pbonzini at redhat.com
Wed Aug 17 13:24:39 EDT 2011

On 08/17/2011 10:19 AM, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> Note that if we ever get a sys_membarrier system call merged into the
> Linux kernel, I'd be willing to replace the signal-based RCU support by
> the sys_membarrier version as a drop-in replacement, because the latter
> has the same read-side performance as signal-based, is much simpler in
> terms of user-space implementation, and does not require any signal
> number.
> Thoughts ?

Yes, I agree membarrier is the best of both worlds.

In principle you could choose between (normal, bp, qsbr) x (membarrier, 
mb, signal).  Current qsbr for example is (qsbr, mb).

Perhaps that would clean up the code too.


More information about the lttng-dev mailing list