Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH] remove rq->lock from cpuacct cgroup (Was Re: [PATCH] cpuacct: add a branch prediction | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Date | Tue, 03 Mar 2009 12:54:48 +0100 |
| |
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...
| |