Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262615AbVAPVkq (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Jan 2005 16:40:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262616AbVAPVkq (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Jan 2005 16:40:46 -0500 Received: from canuck.infradead.org ([205.233.218.70]:36357 "EHLO canuck.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262615AbVAPVkm (ORCPT ); Sun, 16 Jan 2005 16:40:42 -0500 Subject: Re: 2.6.11-rc1-mm1 From: Arjan van de Ven To: Robert Wisniewski Cc: Andrew Morton , karim@opersys.com, hch@infradead.org, tglx@linutronix.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <16874.54187.919814.272833@kix.watson.ibm.com> References: <20050114002352.5a038710.akpm@osdl.org> <1105740276.8604.83.camel@tglx.tec.linutronix.de> <41E85123.7080005@opersys.com> <20050116162127.GC26144@infradead.org> <41EAC560.30202@opersys.com> <16874.50688.68959.36156@kix.watson.ibm.com> <20050116123212.1b22495b.akpm@osdl.org> <16874.54187.919814.272833@kix.watson.ibm.com> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 22:40:24 +0100 Message-Id: <1105911624.8734.55.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.2 (2.0.2-3) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 4.1 (++++) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 2.63 on canuck.infradead.org summary: Content analysis details: (4.1 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.3 RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO Received: contains a numeric HELO 1.1 RCVD_IN_DSBL RBL: Received via a relay in list.dsbl.org [] 2.5 RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK RBL: Sent directly from dynamic IP address [80.57.133.107 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] 0.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS RBL: SORBS: sender is listed in SORBS [80.57.133.107 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by canuck.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 544 Lines: 13 On Sun, 2005-01-16 at 16:06 -0500, Robert Wisniewski wrote: > :-) - as above. Furthermore, it seems that reducing the places where > interrupts are disabled would be a good thing? depends at the price. On several cpus, disabling interupts is hundreds of times cheaper than doing an atomic op. - 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/