On Mon, 2012-03-26 at 19:04 +0200, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > Interesting... Why? I mean, why do you dislike stop_machine() in > _cpu_down() ? Just curious. It disturbs all cpus, the -rt people don't like that their FIFO tasks don't get to run, the trading people don't like their RDMA poll loops to be interrupted.. etc. Now arguably, one should simply not do hotplug crap while such things are running, and mostly that's a perfectly fine constraint. But it doesn't help that people view cpu hotplug as a power savings or resource provisioning 'feature' and there's userspace daemons that plug on-demand. But my ultimate goal is to completely remove synchronization that is actively machine wide, since we all know that as long as such stuff exists people will want to use it. Now I don't know we'll ever fully get there -- see the BKL saga -- but its worth trying I think. The module unload and esp. the text_poke usage of stop_machine are much worse offenders, since both those are relatively common and much harder to avoid. -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@xxxxxxxxx. 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