* Christoph Lameter ([email protected]) wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>
> > > The slow path would require disable preemption and two interrupt disables.
> > If the slow path have to call new_slab, then yes. But it seems that not
> > every slow path must call it, so for the other slow paths, only one
> > interrupt disable would be required.
>
> If we include new_slab then we get to 3 times:
>
> 1. In the cmpxchg_local emulation that fails
>
> 2. For the slow path
>
> 3. When calling the page allocator.
>
Hrm, I just want to certify one thing: A lot of code paths seems to go
to the slow path without requiring cmpxchg_local to execute at all. So
is the slow path more likely to be triggered by the (!object),
(!node_match) tests or by these same tests done in the redo after the
initial cmpxchg_local ?
--
Mathieu Desnoyers
Computer Engineering Ph.D. Student, Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
-
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]
