[lkml]   [2001]   [Mar]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [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?

David S. Miller
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:29    [W:0.128 / U:18.244 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site