On Tue, 20 Nov 2007, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:

quoted text
> > @@ -488,11 +487,8 @@ dma_async_memcpy_buf_to_buf(struct dma_c
> >  	tx->tx_set_dest(addr, tx, 0);
> >  	cookie = tx->tx_submit(tx);
> >  
> > -	cpu = get_cpu();
> > -	per_cpu_ptr(chan->local, cpu)->bytes_transferred += len;
> > -	per_cpu_ptr(chan->local, cpu)->memcpy_count++;
> > -	put_cpu();
> > -
> > +	__CPU_ADD(chan->local->bytes_transferred, len);
> > +	__CPU_INC(chan->local->memcpy_count);
> 
> I am wondering about the impact of the preempt disable removal here. It
> means that there is a statistically low probability that we will be
> moved to a different CPU between the bytes_transferred and the
> memcpy_count increments. I hope nobody relies on the fact that the
> per-cpu counts should match perfectly...

True. But as far as I can tell this is just statistics and technically the 
operation is not complete until this function has terminated. So one half 
was run on one and one half on the other. Where the statistics should be 
kept is ambiguous.

Having said that: We could leave the code unchanged if this is a concern.


-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/