On 2016年06月04日 05:35, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 05:20:10PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
On 06/03/2016 05:48 AM, Pan Xinhui wrote:
queued_spin_lock_slowpath should not worry about interrupt change
node->count by accident because ->count is inc and dec when we
enter/leave queue
On 2016年06月03日 19:37, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 05:48:50PM +0800, Pan Xinhui wrote:
queued_spin_lock_slowpath should not worry about interrupt change
node->count by accident because ->count is inc and dec when we
enter/leave queued_spin_lock_slowpath.
So this_cpu_dec() doe
On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 05:20:10PM -0400, Waiman Long wrote:
> On 06/03/2016 05:48 AM, Pan Xinhui wrote:
> >queued_spin_lock_slowpath should not worry about interrupt change
> >node->count by accident because ->count is inc and dec when we
> >enter/leave queued_spin_lock_slowpath.
> >
> >So this_cp
On 06/03/2016 05:48 AM, Pan Xinhui wrote:
queued_spin_lock_slowpath should not worry about interrupt change
node->count by accident because ->count is inc and dec when we
enter/leave queued_spin_lock_slowpath.
So this_cpu_dec() does some no point things here, lets use this_cpu_ptr
for a small op
On Fri, Jun 03, 2016 at 05:48:50PM +0800, Pan Xinhui wrote:
> queued_spin_lock_slowpath should not worry about interrupt change
> node->count by accident because ->count is inc and dec when we
> enter/leave queued_spin_lock_slowpath.
>
> So this_cpu_dec() does some no point things here, lets use t
queued_spin_lock_slowpath should not worry about interrupt change
node->count by accident because ->count is inc and dec when we
enter/leave queued_spin_lock_slowpath.
So this_cpu_dec() does some no point things here, lets use this_cpu_ptr
for a small optimization.
Signed-off-by: Pan Xinhui
---
6 matches
Mail list logo