[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1314298173.27911.86.camel@twins>
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 20:49:32 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
Cc: James Bottomley <James.bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Greg Thelen <gthelen@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mm@...ck.org,
KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki <kamezawa.hiroyu@...fujitsu.com>,
Balbir Singh <bsingharora@...il.com>,
Daisuke Nishimura <nishimura@....nes.nec.co.jp>,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] memcg: remove unneeded preempt_disable
On Thu, 2011-08-25 at 13:46 -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>
> RISC cpus have instruction to construct complex atomic actions by the cpu
> as I have shown before for ARM.
Right, but it only makes sense if the whole thing remains cheaper than
the trivial implementation already available.
For instance, the ARM LL/SC constraints pretty much mandate we do
preempt_disable()/preempt_enable() around them, at which point the point
of doing LL/SC is gone (except maybe for the irqsafe_this_cpu_* stuff).
--
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