On Thu, 2005-08-25 at 12:41 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> OK, here is a new clean patch that address this problem (nothing assumed about
> atomics)
>
Would you just be able to add the atomic sysctl handler that
Christoph suggested?
This introduces lost update problems. 2 CPUs may store to nr_files
in the opposite order that they incremented atomic_nr_files.
It is not terribly bad, because the drift is not cumulative and the
field can't go negative... but its just ugly to add this hack
because there is no atomic sysctl handler.
Eliminating the cli/sti is a good idea though, I think.
--
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
-
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]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
| |
 |