From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 16:40:59 -0700 (PDT) From: Christoph Lameter Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] scalable rw_mutex In-Reply-To: <20070516162829.23f9b1c4.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Message-ID: References: <20070511131541.992688403@chello.nl> <20070511132321.895740140@chello.nl> <20070511093108.495feb70.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070511110522.ed459635.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070512110624.9ac3aa44.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <20070516162829.23f9b1c4.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Andrew Morton Cc: Andi Kleen , Peter Zijlstra , linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Oleg Nesterov , Ingo Molnar , Thomas Gleixner , Nick Piggin List-ID: On Wed, 16 May 2007, Andrew Morton wrote: > (I hope. Might have race windows in which the percpu_counter_sum() count is > inaccurate?) The question is how do these race windows affect the locking scheme? -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org