Re: [PATCH 05/11] qspinlock: Optimize for smaller NR_CPUS

[Paolo Bonzini]

Il 07/07/2014 17:35, Peter Zijlstra ha scritto:
> > > Unlike the change in patch 4, clear_pending_set_locked doesn't change how
> > > qspinlock moves from a state to the next.
> True, but its where we start to break up into smaller functions. And the
> only reason we break them out is because we'll get different
> implementations depending on NR_CPUS.
>
> So we can view the breakout of xchg_tail and clear_and_set_pending as
> preparatory work for introducing the NR_CPUS thing.

That's a different reasoning, but it's fine by me too.

Paolo
--
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/