lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Sep]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From"Hua Zhong" <>
SubjectRE: lockdep oddity
DateWed, 6 Sep 2006 01:23:02 -0700
We are just trading accuracy for speed here.

> 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 10:27    [from the cache]
©2003-2008