Re: [PATCH] local_irq_disable removal

Ingo Molnar
2005-06-11T20:04:59Z

* Esben Nielsen <simlo@phys.au.dk> wrote:

> > the jury is still out on the accuracy of those numbers. The test had
> > RT_DEADLOCK_DETECT (and other -RT debugging features) turned on, which
> > mostly work with interrupts disabled. The other question is how were
> > interrupt response times measured.
> >
> You would accept a patch where I made this stuff optional?

I'm not sure why. The soft-flag based local_irq_disable() should in fact
be a tiny bit faster than the cli based approach, on a fair number of
CPUs. But it should definitely not be slower in any measurable way.

Ingo