[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20080814012638.BA70D154495@magilla.localdomain>
Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 18:26:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: Roland McGrath <roland@...hat.com>
To: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
Cc: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Ulrich Drepper <drepper@...hat.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
"Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lclaudio@...g.org>,
Clark Williams <williams@...hat.com>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] x86 alternatives : fix LOCK_PREFIX race with preemptible
kernel and CPU hotplug
> That said, I wonder how useful it is to do the SMP->UP code transition.
> How often does a kernel go from being SMP to UP in a situation where we
> really care about the performance? And that won't be shortly be
> becoming SMP again anyway?
I agree, it only seems worthwhile to do this substitution when from the
config+hardware it's determined at boot that nr_cpus_possible==1 (i.e. no
CPU hotplug possibility).
Thanks,
Roland
--
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