On Thu, 2011-06-16 at 22:25 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > Whatever does the boosting will need to have process context and > > can be subject to delays, so that pretty much needs to be a > > kthread. But it will context-switch quite rarely, so should not be > > a problem. > > So user-return notifiers ought to be the ideal platform for that, > right? We don't even have to touch the scheduler: anything that > schedules will eventually return to user-space, at which point the > RCU GC magic can run. > > And user-return-notifiers can be triggered from IRQs as well. > > That allows us to get rid of softirqs altogether and maybe even speed > the whole thing up and allow it to be isolated better. I'm a little worried of relying on things returning to userspace. One could imagine something like a router appliance where userspace is essentially asleep forever and everything happens in the kernel (networking via softirq, maybe NFS kernel server, ...) Cheers, Ben. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxx For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Fight unfair telecom internet charges in Canada: sign http://stopthemeter.ca/ Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@xxxxxxxxx";> email@xxxxxxxxx </a>