Hi Tejun Heo:
Tejun Heo said, at 2012/11/15 22:53:
> On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 02:19:38PM +, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>> Tejon: Could you pick up this patchset?
>
> Sure, but, Shan, when posting patchset, please make the patches
> replies to the head message; otherwise, it's pretty difficult to
On Thu, Nov 15, 2012 at 02:19:38PM +, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> Tejon: Could you pick up this patchset?
Sure, but, Shan, when posting patchset, please make the patches
replies to the head message; otherwise, it's pretty difficult to track
what's going on with the patchset as a whole. I see t
Tejon: Could you pick up this patchset?
On Tue, 13 Nov 2012, Shan Wei wrote:
> this_cpu_ptr/this_cpu_read is faster than per_cpu_ptr(p, smp_processor_id())
> and can reduce memory accesses.
> The latter helper needs to find the offset for current cpu,
> and needs more assembler instructions whic
this_cpu_ptr/this_cpu_read is faster than per_cpu_ptr(p, smp_processor_id())
and can reduce memory accesses.
The latter helper needs to find the offset for current cpu,
and needs more assembler instructions which objdump shows in following.
this_cpu_ptr relocates and address. this_cpu_read() re
4 matches
Mail list logo
