[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1286866471.7768.192.camel@yhuang-dev>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2010 14:54:31 +0800
From: Huang Ying <ying.huang@...el.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v3 3/6] x86, NMI, Rewrite NMI handler
On Tue, 2010-10-12 at 14:49 +0800, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-10-12 at 14:45 +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-10-12 at 14:40 +0800, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2010-10-12 at 14:37 +0800, Huang Ying wrote:
> > > > I just think two die_value make order more explicit.
> > >
> > > I think it sucks, you get to iterate the list twice for no gain.
> >
> > The gain is the code readability. And maybe we can split the list into 2
> > in the future.
>
> No, its not making sense, there's only one event source - the NMI, it
> doesn't make any sense what so ever to then artificially split it in
> two.
They are two steps to process NMI.
Best Regards,
Huang Ying
--
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