On Thu, Sep 03, 2009 at 12:45:43PM -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Thu, 3 Sep 2009, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > > on a SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU cache, there is no need to try to optimize this > > rcu_barrier() call, unless we want superfast reboot/halt sequences... > > I stilll think that the action to quiesce rcu is something that the caller > of kmem_cache_destroy must take care of. Why? Thanx, Paul > Could you split this into two patches: One that addresses the poison and > another that deals with rcu? > -- 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
