[PATCH 1/8] jump_label: no need to acquire the jump_label_mutex in jump_lable_init()

Kevin Hao haokexin at gmail.com
Fri Aug 21 13:17:55 AEST 2015

On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 08:29:03PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 08:14:29PM +0800, Kevin Hao wrote:
> > The jump_label_init() run in a very early stage, even before the
> > sched_init(). So there is no chance for concurrent access of the
> > jump label table.
> It also doesn't hurt to have it. Its better to be consistent and
> conservative with locking unless there is a pressing need.

Yes, it has no real hurt. IMHO it may cause confusion that the function
jump_label_init() may run in two different thread context simultaneously. 
Anyway if you guys don't think so, I can drop this patch.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.ozlabs.org/pipermail/linuxppc-dev/attachments/20150821/3a6a0232/attachment.sig>

More information about the Linuxppc-dev mailing list