Messages in this thread | | | From | "David S. Miller" <> | Date | Wed, 21 Mar 2001 03:30:46 -0800 (PST) | Subject | Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preemptible kernel |
| |
george anzinger writes: > By the by, if a preemption lock is all that is needed the patch defines > it and it is rather fast (an inc going in and a dec & test comming > out). A lot faster than a spin lock with its "LOCK" access. A preempt > lock does not need to be "LOCK"ed because the only contender is the same > cpu.
So we would have to invoke this thing around every set of smp_processor_id() references?
Later, David S. Miller davem@redhat.com - 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/
| |