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]