Re: [PATCH #2] console lock grabbed too early in printk...

From: Jeff Garzik (jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com)
Date: Mon Jul 03 2000 - 17:12:04 EST

Next message: Michael Meding: "Backport of AGP support to 2.2.x from 2.4, anyone ?"
Previous message: Stephen C. Tweedie: "Re: More 2.2.17pre9 VM issues"
In reply to: Chris Lattner: "Re: [PATCH #2] console lock grabbed too early in printk..."
Next in thread: Chris Lattner: "Re: [PATCH #2] console lock grabbed too early in printk..."
Reply: Chris Lattner: "Re: [PATCH #2] console lock grabbed too early in printk..."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Chris Lattner wrote:
> But my point all along is that it only addes a spin_lock and spin_unlock
> on a very low contended lock (unless you're doing tons of printk's, in

Phrased another way, you added a totally new lock to a very common
path..

Jeff

-- Jeff Garzik | Building 1024 | Make my funk the p-funk. MandrakeSoft, Inc. |

- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Next message: Michael Meding: "Backport of AGP support to 2.2.x from 2.4, anyone ?"
Previous message: Stephen C. Tweedie: "Re: More 2.2.17pre9 VM issues"
In reply to: Chris Lattner: "Re: [PATCH #2] console lock grabbed too early in printk..."
Next in thread: Chris Lattner: "Re: [PATCH #2] console lock grabbed too early in printk..."
Reply: Chris Lattner: "Re: [PATCH #2] console lock grabbed too early in printk..."
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jul 07 2000 - 21:00:13 EST