From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@steeleye.com>
To: Andrea Arcangeli <andrea@suse.de>
Cc: Hugh Dickins <hugh@veritas.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org
Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] rmap: parisc __flush_dcache_page
Date: 08 Apr 2004 12:43:45 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1081446226.2105.402.camel@mulgrave> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20040408171017.GJ31667@dualathlon.random>
On Thu, 2004-04-08 at 12:10, Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
> I said above per-arch abstraction, a per-arch abstraction isn't an irq
> safe spinlock, we cannot add an irq safe spinlock there, it'd be too bad
> for all the common archs that don't need to walk those lists (actually
> trees in my -aa tree) from irq context.
I think we agree on the abstraction thing. I was more wondering what
you thought was so costly about an irq safe spinlock as opposed to an
ordinary one? Is there something adding to this cost I don't know
about? i.e. should we be thinking about something like RCU or phased
tree approach to walking the mapping lists?
James
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-04-08 17:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-04-08 13:41 [parisc-linux] rmap: parisc __flush_dcache_page Hugh Dickins
2004-04-08 13:41 ` Hugh Dickins
2004-04-08 13:52 ` [parisc-linux] " James Bottomley
2004-04-08 13:52 ` James Bottomley
2004-04-08 14:16 ` Hugh Dickins
2004-04-08 14:16 ` Hugh Dickins
2004-04-08 14:16 ` Hugh Dickins
2004-04-08 14:40 ` James Bottomley
2004-04-08 14:40 ` James Bottomley
2004-04-08 15:14 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-08 15:14 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-08 15:28 ` James Bottomley
2004-04-08 15:34 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-08 15:47 ` James Bottomley
2004-04-08 15:47 ` James Bottomley
2004-04-08 16:16 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-08 16:29 ` James Bottomley
2004-04-08 17:10 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-08 17:10 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-08 17:43 ` James Bottomley
2004-04-08 17:43 ` James Bottomley [this message]
2004-04-08 17:51 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-08 17:51 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-08 18:07 ` James Bottomley
2004-04-08 18:18 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-08 18:28 ` James Bottomley
2004-04-08 18:42 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-08 18:49 ` James Bottomley
2004-04-08 19:02 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-08 19:02 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-08 18:49 ` James Bottomley
2004-04-10 1:21 ` Paul E. McKenney
2004-04-10 1:21 ` Paul E. McKenney
2004-04-08 18:42 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-08 18:28 ` James Bottomley
2004-04-08 18:18 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-08 18:07 ` James Bottomley
2004-04-08 16:29 ` James Bottomley
2004-04-08 16:16 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-08 15:34 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-08 15:28 ` James Bottomley
2004-04-08 15:35 ` Hugh Dickins
2004-04-08 15:35 ` Hugh Dickins
2004-04-08 15:35 ` Hugh Dickins
2004-04-08 16:13 ` Andrea Arcangeli
2004-04-08 16:13 ` Andrea Arcangeli
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2004-04-08 13:41 Hugh Dickins
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1081446226.2105.402.camel@mulgrave \
--to=james.bottomley@steeleye.com \
--cc=andrea@suse.de \
--cc=hugh@veritas.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=parisc-linux@parisc-linux.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.