Re: [PATCH] NMI request/release

John Levon (levon@movementarian.org)
Tue, 22 Oct 2002 20:08:18 +0100


On Tue, Oct 22, 2002 at 01:29:55PM -0500, Corey Minyard wrote:

> I would vote against using it for profiling; profiling has it's own
> special fast-path, anyway.

But it would be good (less code, simpler, and even possibly for keeping
NMI watchdog ticking when oprofile is running) if we could merge the two
cases.

> The NMI watchdog only gets hit once every
> minute or so, it seems, so that seems suitable for this.

It can easily be much more frequent than that (though you could argue
this is a mis-setup).

> I've looked at the RCU code a little more, and I think I understand it
> better. I think your scenario will work, if it's true that it won't be
> called until all CPUs have done what you say. I'll look at it a little
> more.

Thanks for looking into this ...

regards
john

-- 
"This is mindless pedantism up with which I will not put."
	- Donald Knuth on Pascal's lack of default: case statement
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/