lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [May]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [GIT PULL] ring-buffer: Replace this_cpu_*() with __this_cpu_*()
On Tue, 19 May 2015 10:35:32 -0500 (CDT)
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Mar 2015, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 15:16:25 -0700
> > Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > > So I don't think the ring-buffer change is necessarily _wrong_, but if
> > > this is a performance issue, why don't we just fix it up for the
> > > generic case rather than for just one user?
> >
> > I totally agree with your analysis, but it's up to Christoph to come up
> > with an answer to your questions.
>
> Something beyond: Do not use this_cpu_* when preemption is already
> off but use __this_cpu_*?

I think the question was, why exactly does the generic this_cpu_read()
require disabling preemption? What breaks if it is not disabled?

-- Steve


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-05-19 18:01    [W:0.065 / U:0.460 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site