From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753493AbXJ2Gao (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Oct 2007 02:30:44 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751186AbXJ2Gah (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Oct 2007 02:30:37 -0400 Received: from rv-out-0910.google.com ([209.85.198.184]:24983 "EHLO rv-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751287AbXJ2Gag (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Oct 2007 02:30:36 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=BaHOTxfDu9UFzf/PZGebfDE1RMxvIk6V462lxIVLsDf1xP9I+Dxptw3/KuubhI2HpgFFD67/V5vKSNopd4uQRhCsalaaa7Tba/uCZX3B7kNoJIUOTyj5phwyeXZcenUF5pFjERph8/4nfb+nkx8FCMeZv7NtEEss48dp9/AAX1g= Message-ID: <84144f020710282330v5df5df32v1a766e653081a751@mail.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 08:30:35 +0200 From: "Pekka Enberg" To: "Christoph Lameter" Subject: Re: [patch 09/10] SLUB: Do our own locking via slab_lock and slab_unlock. Cc: "Matthew Wilcox" , akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20071028033156.022983073@sgi.com> <20071028033300.479692380@sgi.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: d7b9779fbe510cde Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On 10/29/07, Christoph Lameter wrote: > > We don't need preempt_enable for CONFIG_SMP, right? > > preempt_enable is needed if preemption is enabled. Disabled? But yeah, I see that slab_trylock() can leave preemption disabled if cmpxchg fails. Was confused by the #ifdefs... :-)