Linux 2.6.32-rc1
in [Kernel]
|
From: Eric Dumazet on 30 Sep 2009 17:00 Ingo Molnar a �crit : >> On Wed, 30 Sep 2009, Eric Dumazet wrote: >>> Yes, I provided following version in my first answer but apparently >>> it was too complex :) > > Yeah, i too missed it while reading through the thread. > > Ingo Well, I was refering to Arjan answer, not Linus/Ingo ones, and Arjan did read my answer and said it was buggy... Its not a problem I dont have 486 here anyway :) You are all obviously right, I should more carefuly edit mails before hit 'Envoyer' button. Thanks -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Linus Torvalds on 30 Sep 2009 17:00 On Wed, 30 Sep 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > It wasn't too complex, but YOU QUOTED THE WHOL F*CKING EMAIL. Sorry for shouting, but it's a pet peeve. Linus -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Ingo Molnar on 30 Sep 2009 17:10 * Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Ingo Molnar a �crit : > >> On Wed, 30 Sep 2009, Eric Dumazet wrote: > >>> Yes, I provided following version in my first answer but apparently > >>> it was too complex :) > > > > Yeah, i too missed it while reading through the thread. > > > > Ingo > > Well, I was refering to Arjan answer, not Linus/Ingo ones, and Arjan > did read my answer and said it was buggy... Its not a problem I dont > have 486 here anyway :) I picked up the improvement that is in your version nevertheless. Even if it doesnt matter in practice we dont drop good code :) > You are all obviously right, I should more carefuly edit mails before > hit 'Envoyer' button. It happens. Since email on lkml is the precursor to real code, one should generally treat it with the same high level of taste you treat the final code with. Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: David Miller on 30 Sep 2009 18:00 From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds(a)linux-foundation.org> Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2009 13:41:26 -0700 (PDT) > Please spend the time to edit quoting levels, because otherwise people > won't spend the time to look at your new text. Indeed, Eric, please do. This has been bugging me in networking land for quite some time as well. If you notice, when I comment on patches I kill all of the patch from the reply except for the specific hunks I want to comment on. If one has to scroll multiple screens just to see what you have to say, that's a burdon on every person who you might get feedback from. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
From: Yuhong Bao on 30 Sep 2009 20:50
<20090930173102.2d54534c(a)infradead.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 ---------------------------------------- > Date: Wed=2C 30 Sep 2009 17:31:02 +0200 > From: arjan(a)infradead.org > To: eric.dumazet(a)gmail.com > CC: torvalds(a)linux-foundation.org=3B schwidefsky(a)de.ibm.com=3B tglx(a)linut= ronix.de=3B johnstul(a)us.ibm.com=3B linux-kernel(a)vger.kernel.org=3B a.p.zijl= stra@c > Subject: Re: Linux 2.6.32-rc1 > > On Wed=2C 30 Sep 2009 17:27:05 +0200 > Eric Dumazet wrote: >> >>> + pop %edi >> Why do you pop flags in edi=2C to later re-push them ? >> >>> + cli > > because here I disable interrupts But popping the flags to edi to later repush them should not be necessary u= nless you are switching esp. Getting rid of this will allow the push/pop edi at the beginning/end to be eliminated=2C reducing code size as well as increasing the speed. > (basically this is local_irq_save() ) >> >> >>> + xchg (%esi)=2C %ebx >>> + xchg 4(%esi)=2C %ecx >> How this sequence is guaranteed to be atomic with other cpus ? > > it is not. this is the 486 implementation which is !SMP > (just like the current cmpxchg64() fallback) BTW=2C NT4 had a SMP version of this emulation that used a simple spinlock: http://www.geoffchappell.com/viewer.htm?doc=3Dstudies/windows/km/cpu/cx8.ht= m Yuhong Bao =0A= _________________________________________________________________=0A= Insert movie times and more without leaving Hotmail=AE.=0A= http://windowslive.com/Tutorial/Hotmail/QuickAdd?ocid=3DTXT_TAGLM_WL_HM_Tut= orial_QuickAdd_062009= -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo(a)vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ |