[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1351617192.8467.124.camel@gandalf.local.home>
Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 13:13:12 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Paul Gortmaker <paul.gortmaker@...driver.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] irq_work: A couple fixes
On Tue, 2012-10-30 at 17:25 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> No I was worried about the cpu_relax() in irq_work_sync()
That one is fine too, as this is the purpose of cpu_relax(). Not only to
relax the cpu, but also to tell gcc that the loop needs to be reread.
-- Steve
--
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