lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Sep]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: lockdep oddity
    On Wed, Sep 06, 2006 at 12:47:24AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
    > On Wed, 6 Sep 2006 09:20:43 +0200
    > Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@de.ibm.com> wrote:
    >
    > > I'm also wondering why the profile
    > > patch contains this:
    > >
    > > + if (ret)
    > > + likeliness->count[1]++;
    > > + else
    > > + likeliness->count[0]++;
    > >
    > > This isn't smp safe. Is that on purpose or a bug?
    >
    > Purposeful. This is called from all contexts, including NMI.

    Why not use atomic_inc then? Or is there some architecture dependent
    limitation that it can't be done in every context?
    -
    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: 2006-09-06 10:09    [W:4.342 / U:0.076 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site