On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 12:31:52PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > So I'm wondering if it would be reasonable to make it out-of-line when > > TRACE_IRQFLAGS is off. This may make a difference because the > > networking stack is a frequent user of local_bh_disable and > > local_bh_enable. > > do you mean to make it inline again?
Yes I meant in-line :) > (btw., generally i think local_bh_disable() is a poor API because it is > opaque about the data structure dependency that it governs. Explicit > exclusion rules generally work better.) I see where you're coming from especially with your preemptible softirq work. However I'm mostly thinking about the existing callers of local_bh_disable in the networking stack. Thanks, -- Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/ Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
