From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264938AbTGBL7G (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jul 2003 07:59:06 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264952AbTGBL7G (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jul 2003 07:59:06 -0400 Received: from [66.212.224.118] ([66.212.224.118]:16138 "EHLO hemi.commfireservices.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264938AbTGBL7F (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Jul 2003 07:59:05 -0400 Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 08:02:19 -0400 (EDT) From: Zwane Mwaikambo X-X-Sender: zwane@montezuma.mastecende.com To: Herbert Xu Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: To make a function get executed on cpu2 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2 Jul 2003, Herbert Xu wrote: > Surely you can emulate it using smp_call_function and make it return > straight away if it runs on the wrong CPU. Yes you can, i thought about the same thing, but it simply generates unecessary APIC bus traffic and just sounds horrid. Not to mention it doesn't sound all that friendly on larger systems. But if you're using smp_call_function you're not really all that speed critical anyway, so this should suffice. Zwane -- function.linuxpower.ca