On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 23:26:52 -0700 "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 03/31/2010 03:26 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > > Not by adding overhead to every single down_read()/down_write() just to > > fix a once-off startup problem - that's taking laziness way too far. > > > > How much overhead is this on non-x86 architectures (keep in mind x86 > doesn't use this?) > Just a few instructions, I guess. But we can do it with zero. And from a design POV, pretending that down_read()/down_write() can be called with interrupts disabled is daft - they cannot! Why muck up the usual code paths with this startup-specific hack? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
