[lkml]   [2004]   [Nov]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] [CPU-HOTPLUG] convert cpucontrol to be a rwsem
On Mon, 2004-11-01 at 13:04 -0500, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Mon, 2004-11-01 at 07:00 -0700, Zwane Mwaikambo wrote:
> > Agreed it makes a lot more sense, i think there could be some places where
> > we use preempt_disable to protect against cpu offline which could
> > converted, but that can come later.
> >
> You know I picked up Robert Love's book the other day and was surprised
> to read we are not supposed to be using preempt_disable, there is a
> per_cpu interface for exactly this kind of thing. Which is currently
> recommended?

get_cpu() both ensures that this CPU won't go down, and ensures we won't
get scheduled off it. It returns the current processor ID, as well.
put_cpu() puts the CPU back.

In my experience it's usually clearer than preempt_disable().

A bad analogy is like a leaky screwdriver -- Richard Braakman

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:07    [W:0.058 / U:0.972 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site