From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [git pull] scheduler updates
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2008 11:20:50 -0800 (PST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.00.0811081115290.3468@nehalem.linux-foundation.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20081108190517.GA9806@elte.hu>
On Sat, 8 Nov 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> So that's why my change moves it from the __native_read_tsc() over to
> _only_ the vget_cycles().
Ahh. I was looking at native_read_tscp(). Which has no barriers. But then
we don't actually save the actual TSC, we only end up using the "p" part,
so we don't care..
Anyway, even for the vget_cycles(), is there really any reason to have
_two_ barriers? Also, I still think it would be a hell of a lot more
readable and logical to put the barriers in the _caller_, so that people
actually see what the barriers are there for.
When they are hidden, they make no sense. The helper function just has two
insane barriers without explanation, and the caller doesn't know that the
code is serialized wrt something random.
Linus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-08 19:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-08 17:02 Ingo Molnar
2008-11-08 18:28 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-11-08 18:38 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-11-08 18:41 ` Arjan van de Ven
2008-11-08 19:00 ` Linus Torvalds
2008-11-08 19:05 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-08 19:20 ` Linus Torvalds [this message]
2008-11-08 19:29 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-17 22:43 ` Venki Pallipadi
2008-11-17 22:50 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-17 23:04 ` Venki Pallipadi
2008-11-17 23:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-08 19:40 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-08 19:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-08 18:52 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-08 18:57 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-11-08 19:32 ` Ingo Molnar
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2018-02-06 21:38 [GIT PULL] " Ingo Molnar
2008-03-21 16:23 [git pull] " Ingo Molnar
2008-02-29 18:04 Ingo Molnar
2008-02-13 15:58 Ingo Molnar
2008-01-31 21:54 Ingo Molnar
2007-12-30 16:45 Ingo Molnar
2007-10-24 16:39 Ingo Molnar
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=alpine.LFD.2.00.0811081115290.3468@nehalem.linux-foundation.org \
--to=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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®