Re: [PATCH 3/4]percpu_counter: fix code for 32bit systems
From: Shaohua Li
Date: Wed Apr 13 2011 - 00:37:17 EST
On Wed, 2011-04-13 at 11:50 +0800, tj@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> 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
We need it for UP case anyway. Ok, I'll change it to irqsave in next
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/