Re: [RFC][PATCH] remove rq->lock from cpuacct cgroup (Was Re:[PATCH] cpuacct: add a branch prediction

[KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki]

Peter Zijlstra  wrote:
> On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 18:04 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
>> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2009-03-03 at 08:42 +0900, KAMEZAWA Hiroyuki wrote:
>> >
>> >> > Furthermore, if you want something like schedule_work_on() for each
>> >> cpu,
>> >> > there's schedule_on_each_cpu().
>> >> >
>> >> It can't pass arguments...Maybe I should use rq->lock here to reset
>> >> other cpu's value.
>> >
>> > Why bother with serializing the reset code at all?
>> >
>>   I don't think reset v.s. read is problem but reset v.s. increment
>>   (read-modify-write) can't be ?
>
> Sure, can be, do we care?
>
If small/easy code allows us to declare "there are any racy case!
and you don't have to check whether you successfully reseted",
it's worth to do I think.

Thanks,
-Kame


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