[ltt-dev] [RFC PATCHv2 4/5] urcu: re-implment urcu-qsbr

Paolo Bonzini pbonzini at redhat.com
Tue Aug 30 04:25:33 EDT 2011

On 08/30/2011 04:56 AM, Lai Jiangshan wrote:
> When readers>  cores, the n_updates is very unstable, so the result of n_updates makes less sense.
> The result show Paolo's patch has advance,
> but my patch has more advance for reader site performance.

No doubt about that---we're just looking for the right abstraction for 
your patch.

Do you have a pointer to a paper or something explaining the "proxy 
lock" concept?


More information about the lttng-dev mailing list