![]() | ||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> writes: > On Wed, 05 Jul 2006 23:42:00 -0600> ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman) wrote:>>> So I suspect that we need to de-percpuify kernel_stat.irqs.>> I think so. We do:>> struct irq_desc *desc = irq_desc + irq; > > kstat_this_cpu.irqs[irq]++; > > followed immediately by > > spin_lock(&desc->lock); > > false optimisation, or what? As an optimization I can't think of a reason. It is kind of interesting to report that information by cpu. in /proc/interrupts (see show_interrupts). But except for understanding system behavior I can't think of a reason for reporting that information. It was useful information to have when debugging the irq migration code. Eric - 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/ | |||||||||
| Last update: 2006-07-06 06:43 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | ||||||||||