Re: [ck] Re: [PATCH] -mm: Small schedule() optimization

Hi,

On Fri, Mar 17, 2006 at 10:13:47AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Con Kolivas <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Probably better to just
> > 	if (unlikely(in_atomic())) {
> > 		if (!current->exit_state) {
> > 
> > Ingo?
> 
> yeah. There's not much point in nesting likely/unlikely. In fact we can 
> just merge the two conditions, as per updated patch below.

ACK, thanks!

> 	Ingo

Andreas Mohr
-
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/

---

• References:
  • [PATCH] -mm: Small schedule() optimization
    • From: Andreas Mohr <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] -mm: Small schedule() optimization
    • From: Con Kolivas <[email protected]>
  • Re: [PATCH] -mm: Small schedule() optimization
    • From: Ingo Molnar <[email protected]>

• Prev by Date: Re: oom-killer: gfp_mask=0xd1 with 2.6.15.4 on EM64T [previously 2.6.12]
• Next by Date: R: libata/sata errors on ich[?]/maxtor
• Previous by thread: Re: [PATCH] -mm: Small schedule() optimization
• Next by thread: RE: [PATCH] ftruncate on huge page couldn't extend hugetlb file
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread

[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]