[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20061127165643.GD5348@infradead.org>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 16:56:43 +0000
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
To: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Tom Zanussi <zanussi@...ibm.com>,
Karim Yaghmour <karim@...rsys.com>,
Paul Mundt <lethal@...ux-sh.org>, Jes Sorensen <jes@....com>,
Richard J Moore <richardj_moore@...ibm.com>,
"Martin J. Bligh" <mbligh@...igh.org>,
Michel Dagenais <michel.dagenais@...ymtl.ca>,
Douglas Niehaus <niehaus@...s.ku.edu>, ltt-dev@...fik.org,
systemtap@...rces.redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/16] LTTng 0.6.36 for 2.6.18 : atomic UP operations on SMP
On Fri, Nov 24, 2006 at 04:55:18PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> This patch adds a UP flavor of SMP operations which is intended to provide
> atomic modification of per-cpu data without suffering from the LOCK of memory
> barrier performance cost. Note that extreme care must be taken when accessing
> this data from different CPUs : smp_wmb() and smp_rmb() must be used
> explicitely. As this last scenario happens very rarely in LTTng, it provides a
We already have local_t in asm/local.h for this purposed. Unfortunately
several architecture implementations are rather suboptimal, but I'm sure
the architecture maintainers would be interested in patches to optimize
the various implementations.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists