On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 12:32:43PM -0400, Josef Sipek wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 11:58:22PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Provide an accurate version of percpu_counter_read.
> >
> > Should we go and replace the current use of percpu_counter_sum()
> > with percpu_counter_sum_positive(),
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 11:58:22PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Provide an accurate version of percpu_counter_read.
>
> Should we go and replace the current use of percpu_counter_sum()
> with percpu_counter_sum_positive(), and call this new primitive
> percpu_counter_sum() instead?
>
>
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 11:58:22PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Provide an accurate version of percpu_counter_read.
Should we go and replace the current use of percpu_counter_sum()
with percpu_counter_sum_positive(), and call this new primitive
percpu_counter_sum() instead?
Signed-off-by:
On Tue, Jul 17, 2007 at 12:32:43PM -0400, Josef Sipek wrote:
On Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 11:58:22PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
Provide an accurate version of percpu_counter_read.
Should we go and replace the current use of percpu_counter_sum()
with percpu_counter_sum_positive(), and call
Provide an accurate version of percpu_counter_read.
Should we go and replace the current use of percpu_counter_sum()
with percpu_counter_sum_positive(), and call this new primitive
percpu_counter_sum() instead?
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
include/linux/percpu_counter.h
Provide an accurate version of percpu_counter_read.
Should we go and replace the current use of percpu_counter_sum()
with percpu_counter_sum_positive(), and call this new primitive
percpu_counter_sum() instead?
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
include/linux/percpu_counter.h |
6 matches
Mail list logo