[RFC, PATCH] fs: push rcu_barrier() from deactivate_locked_super() to filesystems
viro at ZenIV.linux.org.uk
Fri Jun 8 16:25:33 MDT 2012
On Fri, Jun 08, 2012 at 03:06:20PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> .. hmm. I think you may be right. Even if we do move it up, we
> probably shouldn't use it.
> We don't even want SLAB_DESTROY_BY_RCU, since we do the delayed RCU
> free for other reasons anyway, so it would duplicate the RCU delaying
> and cause problems. I forgot about that little complication.
> We could have a separate "RCU_BARRIER_ON_DESTROY" thing, but that's
> just silly too.
Why not make that rcu_barrier() in there unconditional? Where are
we creating/destroying caches often enough for that to become a problem?
More information about the samba-technical