[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080227175726.ad6bda9d.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 17:57:26 -0800
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com>
Cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Torsten Kaiser <just.for.lkml@...glemail.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.25-rc2
On Wed, 27 Feb 2008 15:32:52 -0800 (PST) Christoph Lameter <clameter@....com> wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Feb 2008, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>
> > incrementing the variable with a "++" when interrupts are not disabled.
> > It's not an atomic add and it's racy. The code within stat() does
> > exactly this.
>
> Yes but that is only for used for statistics which can be racy. Note that
> the VM event statistics also can be racy.
>
Doing ++ on a u32 _is_ atomic wrt interrupts on x86 and probably lots of
other architectures, so we're OK using unsigned there. But on some other
architectures ++ on u32 is not atomic wrt interrutps, so they should use
atomic_t or some other arch-specific mechanism.
And guess what? It's already all been done: local_t.
--
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