[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1011261109500.13524@router.home>
Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 11:11:22 -0600 (CST)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
cc: mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, heiko.carstens@...ibm.com,
tglx@...utronix.de, mingo@...e.hu
Subject: Re: [PATCH] printk: use this_cpu_{read|write} api on
printk_pending
On Fri, 26 Nov 2010, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> I guess you read the changelog too fast ;)
No I only read the code.... ;-)
> I posted this patch after noticing printk_needs_cpu() was always used
> for the current cpu.
Ok.
> We have other functions around, that always work for the current cpu.
Ok.
> We pass cpu as a parameter, mostly because smp_processor_id() was a bit
> expensive in old kernels, and is still expensive because of sanity
> tests.
I thought sanity tests do not apply for performance testing scenarios?
smp_processor_id() is usually a simple per cpu data access and very fast.
--
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