From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 24 Jul 2002 21:18:25 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 24 Jul 2002 21:18:24 -0400 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:25607 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 24 Jul 2002 21:18:23 -0400 Message-ID: <3D3F521F.ECB4DBC4@zip.com.au> Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 18:19:27 -0700 From: Andrew Morton X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.19-pre8 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Love CC: torvalds@transmeta.com, riel@conectiva.com.br, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] updated low-latency zap_page_range References: <3D3F4A2F.B1A9F379@zip.com.au> <1027559785.17950.3.camel@sinai> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Robert Love wrote: > > ... > I hope it compiles to nothing! There is a false in an if... oh, wait, > to preserve possible side-effects gcc will keep the need_resched() call > so I guess we should reorder it as: > > if (preempt_count() == 1 && need_resched()) > > Then we get "if (0 && ..)" which should hopefully be evaluated away. > Then the inline is empty and nothing need be done. I think someone changed the definition of preempt_count() while you weren't looking. Plus it's used as an lvalue :( -