lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [Nov]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [patch, 2.6.10-rc2] sched: fix ->nr_uninterruptible handling bugs


On Wed, 17 Nov 2004, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> maybe, but why? Atomic ops are still a tad slower than normal ops

A "tad" slower?

An atomic op is pretty much as expensive as a spinlock/unlock pair on x86.
Not _quite_, but it's pretty close.

So yes, avoiding atomic ops is good if you can do it without any other
real downsides (not having had time to check the patch yet, I won't do
into that ;)

Linus
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-11-18 23:46    [W:1.282 / U:0.272 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site