On 13 Feb 2014, at 12:06, Mike Day wrote: >> I think that, more than contention, it tries to reduce the cost of >> synchronization primitives, especially the locking and unlocking of the list >> around the invocation of timer callbacks. > > Yes, the assumption is that the active timers are a read-mostly list, > so rcu is a win.
Thanks - I'll have a look through. -- Alex Bligh
