Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from mail-we0-f174.google.com ([74.125.82.174]:40557 "EHLO mail-we0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752121Ab2FHW1w (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jun 2012 18:27:52 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20120608222337.GR30000@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> References: <1339191663-17693-1-git-send-email-kirill.shutemov@linux.intel.com> <20120608150253.e42464a6.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20120608221446.GA18250@otc-wbsnb-06> <20120608222337.GR30000@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> From: Linus Torvalds Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 15:27:28 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH, RESEND] fs: push rcu_barrier() from deactivate_locked_super() to filesystems To: Al Viro Cc: "Kirill A. Shutemov" , Andrew Morton , Boaz Harrosh , Tao Ma , Nick Piggin , "Dmitry V. Levin" , v9fs-developer@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-afs@lists.infradead.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org, ceph-devel@vger.kernel.org, linux-cifs@vger.kernel.org, samba-technical@lists.samba.org, codalist@telemann.coda.cs.cmu.edu, ecryptfs@vger.kernel.org, osd-dev@open-osd.org, linux-ext4@vger.kernel.org, fuse-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org, jfs-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net, logfs@logfs.org, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-nilfs@vger.kernel.org, linux-ntfs-dev@lists.sourceforge.net, ocfs2-devel@oss.oracle.com, reiserfs-devel@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 3:23 PM, Al Viro wrote: > > Note that module unload is *not* a hot path - not on any even remotely sane > use. Actually, I think we've had distributions that basically did a "load pretty much everything, and let God sort it out" approach to modules. I know some people *have* actually worried about module load/unload performance. Whether it is "remotely sane" I'm not going to argue for, but .. Linus