mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Blaisorblade <blaisorblade@yahoo.it>
To: Russell King <rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk>
Cc: akpm@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, domen@coderock.org,
	amitg@calsoftinc.com, gud@eth.net
Subject: Re: [patch 1/1] unified spinlock initialization arch/um/drivers/port_kern.c
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 20:52:24 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <200503092052.24803.blaisorblade@yahoo.it> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20050309171231.H25398@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>

On Wednesday 09 March 2005 18:12, Russell King wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 10:42:33AM +0100, blaisorblade@yahoo.it wrote:
> > From: <domen@coderock.org>
> > Cc: <user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>, <domen@coderock.org>,
> > <amitg@calsoftinc.com>, <gud@eth.net>
> >
> > Unify the spinlock initialization as far as possible.

> Are you sure this is really the best option in this instance?
> Sometimes, static data initialisation is more efficient than
> code-based manual initialisation, especially when the memory
> is written to anyway.
Agreed, theoretically, but this was done for multiple reasons globally, for 
instance as a preparation to Ingo Molnar's preemption patches. There was 
mention of this on lwn.net about this:

http://lwn.net/Articles/108719/

Ok?
-- 
Paolo Giarrusso, aka Blaisorblade
Linux registered user n. 292729
http://www.user-mode-linux.org/~blaisorblade


  reply	other threads:[~2005-03-09 20:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-03-09  9:42 blaisorblade
2005-03-09 17:12 ` Russell King
2005-03-09 19:52   ` Blaisorblade [this message]
2005-03-09 22:42     ` Russell King
2005-03-09 22:50       ` Andrew Morton
2005-03-09 23:44         ` linux-os
2005-03-10  2:09           ` Zwane Mwaikambo
2005-03-10  8:12     ` Thomas Gleixner
2005-03-11 19:18       ` [uml-devel] " Blaisorblade

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=200503092052.24803.blaisorblade@yahoo.it \
    --to=blaisorblade@yahoo.it \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=amitg@calsoftinc.com \
    --cc=domen@coderock.org \
    --cc=gud@eth.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rmk+lkml@arm.linux.org.uk \
    --cc=user-mode-linux-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    /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®