* Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > First cut of "big hammer" expedited RCU grace periods, but only > for rcu_bh. This creates another softirq vector, so that entering > this softirq vector will have forced an rcu_bh quiescent state (as > noted by Dave Miller). Use smp_call_function() to invoke > raise_softirq() on all CPUs in order to cause this to happen. > Track the CPUs that have passed through a quiescent state (or gone > offline) with a cpumask. > > Does nothing to expedite callbacks already registered with > call_rcu_bh(), but there is no need to. > > Shortcomings: > > o Untested, probably does not compile, not for inclusion. > > o Does not handle rcu, only rcu_bh. > > Thoughts? I'm wondering, why not just do a two-liner, along the lines of: for_each_online_cpu(cpu) smp_send_reschedule(cpu); That should trigger a quiescent state on all online cpus. It wont perturb the scheduler state (which is reschedule-IPI invariant). (And this is a big-hammer approach anyway so even if it did we wouldnt care.) Am i missing something embarrasingly obvious perhaps? Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
