Re: [PATCH 9/9] RT: Only dirty a cacheline if the priority is actually changing

On Sat, 2007-10-20 at 04:48 +0200, Roel Kluin wrote: > Gregory Haskins wrote: > > We can avoid dirtying a rq related cacheline with a simple check, so why > > not. > > > > Signed-off-by: Gregory Haskins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > --- > > > > 0 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > I

Re: [PATCH 9/9] RT: Only dirty a cacheline if the priority is actually changing

-- On Sat, 20 Oct 2007, Roel Kluin wrote: > Gregory Haskins wrote: > > We can avoid dirtying a rq related cacheline with a simple check, so why > > not. > > > > Signed-off-by: Gregory Haskins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > --- > > > > 0 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) > > I think you

Re: [PATCH 9/9] RT: Only dirty a cacheline if the priority is actually changing

-- On Sat, 20 Oct 2007, Roel Kluin wrote: Gregory Haskins wrote: We can avoid dirtying a rq related cacheline with a simple check, so why not. Signed-off-by: Gregory Haskins [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- 0 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) I think you wanted a patch here?

Re: [PATCH 9/9] RT: Only dirty a cacheline if the priority is actually changing

On Sat, 2007-10-20 at 04:48 +0200, Roel Kluin wrote: Gregory Haskins wrote: We can avoid dirtying a rq related cacheline with a simple check, so why not. Signed-off-by: Gregory Haskins [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- 0 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) I think you wanted a

Re: [PATCH 9/9] RT: Only dirty a cacheline if the priority is actually changing

Gregory Haskins wrote: > We can avoid dirtying a rq related cacheline with a simple check, so why not. > > Signed-off-by: Gregory Haskins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > --- > > 0 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) I think you wanted a patch here? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the

Re: [PATCH 9/9] RT: Only dirty a cacheline if the priority is actually changing

Gregory Haskins wrote: We can avoid dirtying a rq related cacheline with a simple check, so why not. Signed-off-by: Gregory Haskins [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- 0 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) I think you wanted a patch here? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line

[PATCH 9/9] RT: Only dirty a cacheline if the priority is actually changing

We can avoid dirtying a rq related cacheline with a simple check, so why not. Signed-off-by: Gregory Haskins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- 0 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL

[PATCH 9/9] RT: Only dirty a cacheline if the priority is actually changing

We can avoid dirtying a rq related cacheline with a simple check, so why not. Signed-off-by: Gregory Haskins [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- 0 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-) - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe linux-kernel in the body of a message to [EMAIL