[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B8650A2.9060803@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 19:27:46 +0900
From: Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>
CC: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
Samu Onkalo <samu.p.onkalo@...ia.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] workqueues: microoptimize set_wq_data()
Hello, again.
On 02/25/2010 12:10 PM, Tejun Heo wrote:
>> @@ -220,12 +220,9 @@ struct cpu_workqueue_struct *wq_per_cpu(
>> static inline void set_wq_data(struct work_struct *work,
>> struct cpu_workqueue_struct *cwq)
>> {
>> - unsigned long new;
>> -
>> - BUG_ON(!work_pending(work));
>> -
>> - new = (unsigned long) cwq | (1UL << WORK_STRUCT_PENDING);
>> + unsigned long new = (unsigned long)cwq;
>> new |= WORK_STRUCT_FLAG_MASK & *work_data_bits(work);
>> + BUG_ON(!(new & (1UL << WORK_STRUCT_PENDING)));
>> atomic_long_set(&work->data, new);
>
> Will apply under cmwq patches for the next merge window.
Turns out I already have a patch which kills the second
work_data_bits() dereferencing in the series. The first one is now in
the cmwq series which is about to be posted again.
Thanks.
--
tejun
--
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