Re: [for-next][PATCH 1/4] ring-buffer: Replace this_cpu_() with __this_cpu_()

From: Christoph Lameter
Date: Mon Mar 30 2015 - 10:33:06 EST

Next message: Mathieu Poirier: "Re: [PATCH] stm class: Adding master and channel parameter to ioctl function"
Previous message: Mika Westerberg: "[PATCH] pinctrl: intel: Add Intel Sunrisepoint pin controller and GPIO support"
In reply to: Steven Rostedt: "Re: [for-next][PATCH 1/4] ring-buffer: Replace this_cpu_*() with __this_cpu_*()"
Next in thread: Steven Rostedt: "[PATCH] ring-buffer: Remove duplicate use of '&' in recursive code"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Mon, 30 Mar 2015, Steven Rostedt wrote:

> Hmm, I didn't realize there was an "and" version. I'm guessing this
> would bring down the instruction count even more?

Yes two segment prefixed instructions and a decrement.
--
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/

Next message: Mathieu Poirier: "Re: [PATCH] stm class: Adding master and channel parameter to ioctl function"
Previous message: Mika Westerberg: "[PATCH] pinctrl: intel: Add Intel Sunrisepoint pin controller and GPIO support"
In reply to: Steven Rostedt: "Re: [for-next][PATCH 1/4] ring-buffer: Replace this_cpu_*() with __this_cpu_*()"
Next in thread: Steven Rostedt: "[PATCH] ring-buffer: Remove duplicate use of '&' in recursive code"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Re: [for-next][PATCH 1/4] ring-buffer: Replace this_cpu_*() with __this_cpu_*()

Re: [for-next][PATCH 1/4] ring-buffer: Replace this_cpu_() with __this_cpu_()