Re: [PATCH 3/4]percpu_counter: fix code for 32bit systems

From: tj@xxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tue Apr 12 2011 - 23:50:52 EST

Hello, guys.

On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 11:03:01AM +0800, Shaohua Li wrote:
> I can do this, but please give a reason. If network code is the only
> place requiring disable irq, why not network code do it?

This thread is pointless. The next patch converts it to atomic64_t
and the lock is removed anyway. I think Eric's argument makes sense
given that atomic64_t translates into irqsave spinlock (it has to) in
generic 32bit implementation. That said, this is all a moot point.
We might as well simply drop this patch and directly convert to


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