Andrew Vasquez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, 07 Feb 2005, Andrew Morton wrote: > > > Andrew Vasquez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > - if (smp_processor_id() == ha->last_irq_cpu || was_empty) > > > + if (_smp_processor_id() == ha->last_irq_cpu || was_empty) > > > > Am I correct in assuming that if we are preempted, and if > > _smp_processor_id() returns the wrong number, the driver will continue to > > function correctly? And that we simply missed a little optimisation > > opportunity? > > Yes, the driver will continue to operate correctly. Another > suggestion made was to explicitly disable/enable preemption around the > 'if' statement. The s/smp_processor_id/_smp_processor_id/ seemed like > the least intrusive option in the interim...
It makes perfect sense. James, I'll add this to this evening's patchbatch. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
