[patch] softirq-2.4.10-B3

From: Ingo Molnar (mingo@elte.hu)
Date: Fri Sep 28 2001 - 11:35:05 EST

Next message: Rik van Riel: "Re: Linux 2.4.9-ac16"
Previous message: Ingo Molnar: "Re: [patch] softirq performance fixes, cleanups, 2.4.10."
In reply to: kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru: "Re: [patch] softirq performance fixes, cleanups, 2.4.10."
Next in thread: J . A . Magallon: "Re: [patch] softirq-2.4.10-B3"
Reply: J . A . Magallon: "Re: [patch] softirq-2.4.10-B3"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Fri, 28 Sep 2001 kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru wrote:

> > - '[ksoftirqd_CPU0]' is confusing on UP systems, changed it to
> > '[ksoftirqd]' instead.
>
> It is useless to argue about preferences, but universal naming scheme
> looks as less confusing yet. :-)

since you are the second one to complain, i'm convinced :) reverted.

i've also added back the BUG() check for smp_processor_id() == cpu.

-B3 attached.

Ingo

TEXT/PLAIN attachment: softirq-2.4.10-B3

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Rik van Riel: "Re: Linux 2.4.9-ac16"
Previous message: Ingo Molnar: "Re: [patch] softirq performance fixes, cleanups, 2.4.10."
In reply to: kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru: "Re: [patch] softirq performance fixes, cleanups, 2.4.10."
Next in thread: J . A . Magallon: "Re: [patch] softirq-2.4.10-B3"
Reply: J . A . Magallon: "Re: [patch] softirq-2.4.10-B3"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Sep 30 2001 - 21:01:03 EST