On Thu, 27 Aug 2015 15:18:49 +0200 Frederic Weisbecker <fweis...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 04:45:44PM -0700, Hideaki Kimura wrote: > > I totally agree that this is not a perfect solution. If there are 10x more > > cores and sockets, just the atomic fetch_add might be too expensive. > > > > However, it's comparatively/realistically the best thing we can do without > > any drawbacks. We can't magically force all library developers to write the > > most scalable code always. > > > > My point is: this is a safety net, and a very effective one. > > I mean the problem here is that a library uses an unscalable profiling > feature, > unconditionally as soon as you load it without even initializing anything. And > this library is used in production. > > At first sight, fixing that in the kernel is only a hack that just reduces a > bit > the symptoms. > > What is the technical issue that prevents from fixing that in the library > itself? > Posix timers can be attached anytime. I'm curious to what the downside of this patch set is? If we can fix a problem that should be fixed in userspace, but does not harm the kernel by doing so, is that bad? (an argument for kdbus? ;-) As Hideaki noted, this could be a problem in other locations as well that people have yet to find. -- Steve -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
