Re: [RFC][PATCH 0/5] preempt_count rework

H. Peter Anvin
2013-08-14T15:44:34Z

On 08/14/2013 08:39 AM, Mike Galbraith wrote:
>
> ..so could the rq = cpu_rq(cpu) sequence be improved cycle expenditure
> wise by squirreling rq pointer away in a percpu this_rq, and replacing
> cpu_rq(cpu) above with a __this_cpu_read(this_rq) version of this_rq()?
>

Yes.

-hpa