On Wed, 21 Mar 2001, Keith Owens wrote: > I misread the code, but the idea is still correct. Add a preemption > depth counter to each cpu, when you schedule and the depth is zero then > you know that the cpu is no longer holding any references to quiesced > structures. A task that has been preempted is on the run queue and can be rescheduled on a different CPU, so I can't see how a per-CPU counter would work. It seems to me that you would need a per run queue counter, like the example I gave in a previous posting. Nigel Gamble [EMAIL PROTECTED] Mountain View, CA, USA. http://www.nrg.org/ MontaVista Software [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- [PATCH for 2.5] preemptible kernel Nigel Gamble
- Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preemptible kernel Pavel Machek
- Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preemptible kernel Nigel Gamble
- Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preemptible kernel Rusty Russell
- Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preemptible kernel Keith Owens
- Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preemptible kernel Nigel Gamble
- Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preemptible kernel Keith Owens
- Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preemptible kern... Nigel Gamble
- Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preemptible ... george anzinger
- Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preempti... Keith Owens
- Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preempti... Rusty Russell
- Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preempti... Nigel Gamble
- Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preempti... Dipankar Sarma
- Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preemptible ... Keith Owens
- Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preempti... David S. Miller
- Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preempti... Andrew Morton
- Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preempti... Nigel Gamble
- Re: [PATCH for 2.5] preempti... David S. Miller