On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 01:01:04PM +0300, Avi Kivity wrote:
> On 04/28/2011 12:52 PM, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> >Signed-off-by: Gleb Natapov<gleb@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >@@ -93,11 +93,7 @@ static inline int rcu_needs_cpu(int cpu)
> >
> > #endif /* #else #ifdef CONFIG_TINY_RCU */
> >
> >-static inline void rcu_note_context_switch(int cpu)
> >-{
> >- rcu_sched_qs(cpu);
> >- rcu_preempt_note_context_switch();
> >-}
> >+extern void rcu_note_context_switch(int cpu);
> >
>
> Why are you uninlining this function? Why not export the two
> functions it calls instead?
>
To keep exported interface uniformal between both rcu implementations.
I do not think that rcu_note_context_switch() is inlined for
performance reason since two functions it calls are quite big in rcutiny
implementation. Paul what do you think?
--
Gleb.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
