[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <129600E5E5FB004392DDC3FB599660D7ACCAE1C6@irsmsx504.ger.corp.intel.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Jun 2009 15:02:27 +0100
From: "Sosnowski, Maciej" <maciej.sosnowski@...el.com>
To: "Williams, Dan J" <dan.j.williams@...el.com>,
"cl@...ux-foundation.org" <cl@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Eric Biederman <ebiederm@...stanetworks.com>,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>,
Trond Myklebust <Trond.Myklebust@...app.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
David L Stevens <dlstevens@...ibm.com>,
"mingo@...e.hu" <mingo@...e.hu>,
"rusty@...tcorp.com.au" <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: RE: [this_cpu_xx 06/11] Eliminate get/put_cpu
Dan Williams wrote:
> [ added Maciej to the cc ]
Thanks Dan.
>
> On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 12:18 PM, <cl@...ux-foundation.org> wrote:
>> There are cases where we can use this_cpu_ptr and as the result
>> of using this_cpu_ptr() we no longer need to determine the current executing cpu.
>>
>> In those places no get/put_cpu combination is needed anymore.
>> The local cpu variable can be eliminated.
>>
>> Preemption still needs to be disabled and enabled since the
>> modifications of the per cpu variables is not atomic. There may
>> be multiple per cpu variables modified and those must all
>> be from the same processor.
>>
>> cc: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
>
> Acked-by: Dan Williams <dan.j.williams@...el.com>
Acked-by: Maciej Sosnowski <maciej.sosnowski@...el.com>--
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