[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1012011212490.3774@router.home>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2010 12:13:44 -0600 (CST)
From: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
To: Michael Holzheu <holzheu@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
cc: akpm@...ux-foundation.org, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [thisops uV3 08/18] Taskstats: Use this_cpu_ops
On Wed, 1 Dec 2010, Michael Holzheu wrote:
> > return -ENOMEM;
> >
> > if (!info) {
> > - int seq = get_cpu_var(taskstats_seqnum)++;
> > - put_cpu_var(taskstats_seqnum);
> > + int seq = this_cpu_inc_return(taskstats_seqnum);
>
> Hmmm, wouldn't seq now always be one more than before?
>
> I think that "seq = get_cpu_var(taskstats_seqnum)++" first assigns
> taskstats_seqnum to seq and then increases the value in contrast to
> this_cpu_inc_return() that returns the already increased value, correct?
Correct. We need to subtract one from that (which will eliminate the minus
-1 that the inline this_cpu_inc_return creates).
--
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