Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758741AbYBPQo5 (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Feb 2008 11:44:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755215AbYBPQot (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Feb 2008 11:44:49 -0500 Received: from ausc60ps301.us.dell.com ([143.166.148.206]:7342 "EHLO ausc60ps301.us.dell.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753550AbYBPQos (ORCPT ); Sat, 16 Feb 2008 11:44:48 -0500 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,361,1199685600"; d="scan'208";a="542685593" Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2008 10:44:34 -0600 From: Matt Domsch To: Corey Minyard Cc: Linux Kernel , Andrew Morton , Konstantin Baydarov , OpenIPMI Developers Subject: Re: [Openipmi-developer] [PATCH 3/4] IPMI: convert locked counters to atomics Message-ID: <20080216164434.GC13922@auslistsprd01.us.dell.com> References: <20080214183051.GC20148@minyard.local> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080214183051.GC20148@minyard.local> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 747 Lines: 21 On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 12:30:51PM -0600, Corey Minyard wrote: > From: Konstantin Baydarov > > Atomics are a lot more efficient and neat than using a lock. per_cpu variables are a lot more efficient and neat than using locks for simple statistics. no cache line bouncing to increment the counter. Are these read so often that atomics are really better? Thanks, Matt -- Matt Domsch Linux Technology Strategist, Dell Office of the CTO linux.dell.com & www.dell.com/linux -- 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/