Re: [PATCH] local_irq_disable removal

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 




On Sun, 12 Jun 2005, Ingo Molnar wrote:

> x86 is actually a 'worst-case', because it has one of the cheapest CPU 
> level cli/sti implementations. Usually it's the hard-local_irq_disable() 
> overhead on non-x86 platforms that is a problem. (ARM iirc) So in this 
> sense the soft-flag should be a win on most sane architectures.


My original port of this was on ARM , and I didn't notice a massive slow
down, or anything . I imagine it can't be unbearable. 

Daniel

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Photo]     [Stuff]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Video 4 Linux]     [Linux for the blind]     [Linux Resources]
  Powered by Linux