Lines Matching refs:side
14 tool for the job. Yes, RCU does reduce read-side overhead by
15 increasing write-side overhead, which is exactly why normal uses
24 read-side primitives is critically important.
55 2. Do the RCU read-side critical sections make proper use of
59 under your read-side code, which can greatly increase the
64 rcu_read_lock_sched(), or by the appropriate update-side lock.
68 Letting RCU-protected pointers "leak" out of an RCU read-side
72 -before- letting them out of the RCU read-side critical section.
147 perfectly legal (if redundant) for update-side code to
152 of an RCU read-side critical section. See lockdep.txt
183 be traversed by an RCU read-side critical section.
263 One way to stall the updates is to acquire the update-side
299 list_for_each_safe_rcu(), must be either within an RCU read-side
300 critical section or must be protected by appropriate update-side
301 locks. RCU read-side critical sections are delimited by
308 primitives when the update-side lock is held is that doing so
313 10. Conversely, if you are in an RCU read-side critical section,
314 and you don't hold the appropriate update-side lock, you -must-
346 SRCU read-side critical section (demarked by srcu_read_lock()
348 Please note that if you don't need to sleep in read-side critical
360 synchronize_srcu() waits only for SRCU read-side critical
363 is what makes sleeping read-side critical sections tolerable --
366 system than RCU would be if RCU's read-side critical sections
369 The ability to sleep in read-side critical sections does not
377 requiring SRCU's read-side deadlock immunity or low read-side
401 15. The various RCU read-side primitives do -not- necessarily contain
404 read-side critical sections. It is the responsibility of the
405 RCU update-side primitives to deal with this.
416 read-side critical section, while holding the right