From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261804AbVFKUE7 (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Jun 2005 16:04:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261803AbVFKUE7 (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Jun 2005 16:04:59 -0400 Received: from mx1.elte.hu ([157.181.1.137]:14497 "EHLO mx1.elte.hu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261806AbVFKUEf (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Jun 2005 16:04:35 -0400 Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2005 22:03:52 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Esben Nielsen Cc: Daniel Walker , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, sdietrich@mvista.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] local_irq_disable removal Message-ID: <20050611200352.GA1477@elte.hu> References: <20050611191654.GA22301@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i X-ELTE-SpamVersion: MailScanner 4.31.6-itk1 (ELTE 1.2) SpamAssassin 2.63 ClamAV 0.73 X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-4.9, required 5.9, autolearn=not spam, BAYES_00 -4.90 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamScore: -4 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Esben Nielsen 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