On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 15:51 -0700, Peter W. Morreale wrote: > On Wed, 2009-01-07 at 23:33 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > Can I ask a simple question in light of all this discussion? > > > > > > "Is get_task_struct() really that bad?" > > > > it dirties a cacheline and it also involves atomics. > > > > Also, it's a small design cleanliness issue to me: get_task_struct() > > impacts the lifetime of an object - and if a locking primitive has > > side-effects on object lifetimes that's never nice. > > > > True, but it's for one iteration * NR_CPUS, max. > > Best, > -PWM Never mind. Bogus argument. That's why we have you Big Guns out there... - To keep us rif-raf in line... :-) Best, -PWM -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
