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 21:36:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 24 Jul 2002 21:36:37 -0400 Received: from gateway-1237.mvista.com ([12.44.186.158]:47095 "EHLO av.mvista.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 24 Jul 2002 21:36:37 -0400 Message-ID: <3D3F56C6.B045E8A@mvista.com> Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2002 18:39:18 -0700 From: george anzinger Organization: Monta Vista Software X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.12-20b i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linus Torvalds CC: Robert Love , Andrew Morton , riel@conectiva.com.br, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] updated low-latency zap_page_range References: 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 Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On 24 Jul 2002, Robert Love wrote: > > > > if (preempt_count() == 1 && need_resched()) > > > > Then we get "if (0 && ..)" which should hopefully be evaluated away. > > I think preempt_count() is not unconditionally 0 for non-preemptible > kernels, so I don't think this is a compile-time constant. > > That may be a bug in preempt_count(), of course. > Didn't we just put bh_count and irq_count in the same word??? -- George Anzinger george@mvista.com High-res-timers: http://sourceforge.net/projects/high-res-timers/ Real time sched: http://sourceforge.net/projects/rtsched/ Preemption patch: http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/rml