[lkml]   [2005]   [Dec]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch 04/15] Generic Mutex Subsystem, add-atomic-call-func-x86_64.patch
On Wed, 21 Dec 2005, Nick Piggin wrote:

> Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> > On Tue, 20 Dec 2005, Nick Piggin wrote:
> > > Considering that on UP, the arm should not need to disable interrupts
> > > for this function (or has someone refuted Linus?), how about:
> >
> >
> > Kernel preemption.
> >
> preempt_disable() ?

Sure, and we're now more costly than the current implementation with irq

If we go with simple mutexes that's because there is a gain, even a huge
one on ARM, especially for the fast uncontended case. If you guys
insist on making things so generic and rigid then there is no gain
anymore worth the bother.

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: 2005-12-20 15:37    [W:0.051 / U:0.620 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site