On Wednesday 17 December 2008 10:31:55 Mathieu Desnoyers wrote: > I think we have two different use-cases here : > > - local_t is useful as-is for things such as a tracer, which need to > modify an element of data atomically wrt local interrupts. The > atomic_long_t, in this case, is the correct fallback. > - local_count_t could be used for fast counters. Hi Mathieu, Complete agreement. I guess I'm biassed towards local_t == counter version, something else == nmi-safe version because that's what it was originally. Looking through the tree, there are only 5 users: module, dmaengine and percpu_counter want a counter, and tracing and x86 nmi.c want nmi-safe. There are several other places I know of which want local_t-the-counter. I'll prepare a patch which adds nmi_safe_t, and see how it looks. There's no amazing hurry on this, so I won't race to hit the merge window. Thanks! Rusty. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ia64" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
|