Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759074AbZA1VOu (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jan 2009 16:14:50 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1758752AbZA1VOa (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jan 2009 16:14:30 -0500 Received: from smtp1.linux-foundation.org ([140.211.169.13]:51275 "EHLO smtp1.linux-foundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1758739AbZA1VO3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 28 Jan 2009 16:14:29 -0500 Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:13:27 -0800 From: Andrew Morton To: rostedt@goodmis.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, mingo@elte.hu, tglx@linutronix.de, peterz@infradead.org, arjan@infradead.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, jens.axboe@oracle.com Subject: Re: Buggy IPI and MTRR code on low memory Message-Id: <20090128131327.417b01e1.akpm@linux-foundation.org> In-Reply-To: <20090128131202.21757da6.akpm@linux-foundation.org> References: <20090128131202.21757da6.akpm@linux-foundation.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.2.4 (GTK+ 2.8.20; i486-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 594 Lines: 13 On Wed, 28 Jan 2009 13:12:02 -0800 Andrew Morton wrote: > Thought: do we need to do the kmalloc at all? Perhaps we can instead > use a statically allocated per-cpu call_single_data local to > kernel/smp.c? It would need a spinlock or something to protect it... (not a spinlock - get_cpu_var/put_cpu_var will suffice) -- 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/