From: "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com>
To: george anzinger <george@mvista.com>
Cc: Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au>,
nigel@nrg.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preemptible kernel
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2001 03:30:46 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <15032.37094.204955.41554@pizda.ninka.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3AB88929.D1B324F2@mvista.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.05.10103201920410.26853-100000@cosmic.nrg.org> <22991.985166394@ocs3.ocs-net> <15032.30533.638717.696704@pizda.ninka.net> <3AB88929.D1B324F2@mvista.com>
george anzinger writes:
> By the by, if a preemption lock is all that is needed the patch defines
> it and it is rather fast (an inc going in and a dec & test comming
> out). A lot faster than a spin lock with its "LOCK" access. A preempt
> lock does not need to be "LOCK"ed because the only contender is the same
> cpu.
So we would have to invoke this thing around every set of
smp_processor_id() references?
Later,
David S. Miller
davem@redhat.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-03-21 11:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-03-15 1:25 Nigel Gamble
2001-03-17 17:34 ` Pavel Machek
2001-03-19 21:01 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-20 8:43 ` Rusty Russell
2001-03-20 9:32 ` Keith Owens
2001-03-21 0:48 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-21 1:23 ` Keith Owens
2001-03-21 3:35 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-21 8:04 ` george anzinger
2001-03-21 9:04 ` Keith Owens
2001-03-21 14:32 ` Rusty Russell
2001-03-23 20:42 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-28 11:47 ` Dipankar Sarma
2001-03-21 9:19 ` Keith Owens
2001-03-21 15:46 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2001-03-21 9:41 ` David S. Miller
2001-03-21 10:05 ` Andrew Morton
2001-03-22 0:20 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-21 10:57 ` george anzinger
2001-03-21 11:30 ` David S. Miller [this message]
2001-03-21 17:07 ` george anzinger
2001-03-21 18:18 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-21 22:25 ` Rusty Russell
2001-03-28 10:20 ` Dipankar Sarma
2001-03-28 20:51 ` george anzinger
2001-03-29 9:43 ` Dipankar Sarma
2001-03-30 6:32 ` Keith Owens
2001-03-21 0:24 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-30 0:26 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-30 20:11 ` Rusty Russell
2001-04-01 7:48 ` george anzinger
2001-04-01 21:13 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-04-02 19:56 ` george anzinger
2001-04-04 17:59 ` Rusty Russell
2001-04-01 21:07 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-04-04 17:51 ` Rusty Russell
2001-03-20 18:25 ` Roger Larsson
2001-03-20 22:06 ` Nigel Gamble
2001-03-20 22:27 ` george anzinger
2001-04-06 23:52 Paul McKenney
2001-04-07 0:45 ` Andi Kleen
2001-04-07 1:25 Paul McKenney
2001-04-07 19:59 ` Rusty Russell
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=15032.37094.204955.41554@pizda.ninka.net \
--to=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=george@mvista.com \
--cc=kaos@ocs.com.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nigel@nrg.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®