lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Mar]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC][PATCH] remove rq->lock from cpuacct cgroup (Was Re: [PATCH] cpuacct: add a branch prediction
From
Date
On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 19:42 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 18:04 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> >> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >> > On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 08:42 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> > Furthermore, if you want something like schedule_work_on() for each
> >> >> cpu,
> >> >> > there's schedule_on_each_cpu().
> >> >> >
> >> >> It can't pass arguments...Maybe I should use rq->lock here to reset
> >> >> other cpu's value.
> >> >
> >> > Why bother with serializing the reset code at all?
> >> >
> >> I don't think reset v.s. read is problem but reset v.s. increment
> >> (read-modify-write) can't be ?
> >
> > Sure, can be, do we care?
> >
> If small/easy code allows us to declare "there are any racy case!
> and you don't have to check whether you successfully reseted",
> it's worth to do I think.

smp_call_function() it is...



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-03-03 12:57    [W:0.091 / U:0.336 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site