Re: lockdep oddity

[Heiko Carstens]

On Wed, Sep 06, 2006 at 12:47:24AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2006 09:20:43 +0200
> Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > I'm also wondering why the profile
> > patch contains this:
> > 
> > +       if (ret)
> > +               likeliness->count[1]++;
> > +       else
> > +               likeliness->count[0]++;
> > 
> > This isn't smp safe. Is that on purpose or a bug?
> 
> Purposeful.   This is called from all contexts, including NMI.

Why not use atomic_inc then? Or is there some architecture dependent
limitation that it can't be done in every context?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/