Re: [PATCH 0/2] jump label: 2.6.38 updates

[Ingo Molnar]

* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Fri, 2011-02-11 at 22:38 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > 
> > So why can't we make that jump_label_entry::refcount and
> > jump_label_key::state an atomic_t and be done with it? 
> 
> So I had a bit of a poke at this because I didn't quite understand why
> all that stuff was as it was. I applied both Jason's patches and then
> basically rewrote kernel/jump_label.c just for kicks ;-)
> 
> I haven't tried compiling this, let alone running it, but provided I
> didn't actually forget anything the storage per key is now 16 bytes when
> modules are disabled and 24 * (1 + mods) bytes for when they are
> enabled. The old code had 64 + 40 * mods bytes.
> 
> I still need to clean up the static_branch_else bits and look at !x86
> aside from the already mentioned bits.. but what do people think?

[...]

>  15 files changed, 333 insertions(+), 456 deletions(-)

The diffstat win alone makes me want this :-)

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/