Date: Tue, 19 May 2015 11:42:01 -0400
From: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        stable <stable@vger.kernel.org>,
        Uwe Kleine-Koenig <u.kleine-koenig@pengutronix.de>
Subject: Re: [GIT PULL] ring-buffer: Replace this_cpu_*() with
 __this_cpu_*()
Message-ID: <20150519114201.39c19d61@gandalf.local.home>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.11.1505191033540.27965@gentwo.org>
References: <20150319180216.62c9fa4a@gandalf.local.home>
	<CA+55aFwABeHiPK4fsn1g=V-PR88UnNqCADzVWAzWGORtNFs2Jw@mail.gmail.com>
	<20150319183444.3d26f078@grimm.local.home>
	<alpine.DEB.2.11.1505191033540.27965@gentwo.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1039
Lines: 27

On Tue, 19 May 2015 10:35:32 -0500 (CDT)
Christoph Lameter <cl@linux.com> wrote:

> On Thu, 19 Mar 2015, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 19 Mar 2015 15:16:25 -0700
> > Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
> >
> > > So I don't think the ring-buffer change is necessarily _wrong_, but if
> > > this is a performance issue, why don't we just fix it up for the
> > > generic case rather than for just one user?
> >
> > I totally agree with your analysis, but it's up to Christoph to come up
> > with an answer to your questions.
> 
> Something beyond: Do not use this_cpu_* when preemption is already
> off but use __this_cpu_*?

I think the question was, why exactly does the generic this_cpu_read()
require disabling preemption? What breaks if it is not disabled?

-- Steve
--
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/