Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 14 Mar 2000 00:20:29 +0100 (CET) | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: new IRQ scalability changes in 2.3.48 |
| |
On Mon, 13 Mar 2000, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > hm, current->spinlock_depth should work pretty well i believe, no? That > > one is SMP-safe as well. It doesnt have any global cacheline problems > > either. > > Agreed, but what is the point of it? Now every spinlock has to look up > current. The nice spinlock code that used to be 2 instructions (or 1 > for the unlock case) suddenly became 5 or more. No, thank you. > Especially as I don't believe it buys you anything on SMP.
yep, i agree that it's overkill for SMP. 99% of RT applications are UP, so the global depth-counter should be enough.
Ingo
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |