> On Sun, 15 Jun 2003, Jeff wrote:
>
> > I now realize, that locking is out of the question. Also, it has been
>
> Well spinlocks in particular would be particularly ugly here and cause
> horrid cache line ping pong. Other methods of synchronization would have
> to be looked at.
>
> > suggested to use per cpu stats and overflow into a global counter. (Thanks
> > Zwane) This might be a better idea - the problem is, the counter won't be
> > 100% accurate at all times. The degree of inaccuracy will vary with the
> > threshold value. On the other hand, if the threshold is relatively low, no
> > one will notice the difference these days.
>
> This would be one method of doing updates and for stats it would be fine,
> however feel free to look into other ways...
Looking closer i'd say go for it, there isn't a real locking issue, if
you're looking for something to do this should be rather fun with not
that much breakage, of course you'd also have to update some userland
tools/utilities.
have fun,
Zwane
-- function.linuxpower.ca - 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/