Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 22 Oct 2002 20:08:18 +0100 | From | John Levon <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] NMI request/release |
| |
On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 01:29:55PM -0500, Corey Minyard wrote:
> I would vote against using it for profiling; profiling has it's own > special fast-path, anyway.
But it would be good (less code, simpler, and even possibly for keeping NMI watchdog ticking when oprofile is running) if we could merge the two cases.
> The NMI watchdog only gets hit once every > minute or so, it seems, so that seems suitable for this.
It can easily be much more frequent than that (though you could argue this is a mis-setup).
> I've looked at the RCU code a little more, and I think I understand it > better. I think your scenario will work, if it's true that it won't be > called until all CPUs have done what you say. I'll look at it a little > more.
Thanks for looking into this ...
regards john
-- "This is mindless pedantism up with which I will not put." - Donald Knuth on Pascal's lack of default: case statement - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |