On 03/03/13 01:06, Oleg Nesterov wrote: > On 03/02, Michel Lespinasse wrote: >> >> My version would be slower if it needs to take the >> slow path in a reentrant way, but I'm not sure it matters either :) > > I'd say, this doesn't matter at all, simply because this can only happen > if we race with the active writer. > It can also happen when interrupted. (still very rarely) arch_spin_trylock() ------->interrupted, __this_cpu_read() returns 0. arch_spin_trylock() fails slowpath, any nested will be slowpath too. ... ..._read_unlock() <-------interrupt __this_cpu_inc() .... I saw get_online_cpu_atomic() is called very frequent. And the above thing happens in one CPU rarely, but how often it happens in the whole system if we have 4096 CPUs? (I worries to much. I tend to remove FALLBACK_BASE now, we should add it only after we proved we needed it, this part is not proved) Thanks, Lai -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
