[Devel] Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/4] res_counter check usage under val
xemul at openvz.org
Tue Jul 29 19:09:06 PDT 2008
> I get your point. Logically this lock is unnecessary.
> (And seems this patch itself is buggy..(maybe refresh miss))
> BTW, I'm sorry if I misunderstand. unsigned long long (on x86-32)
> can be compared safely ?
That discourages me, that we need a spinlock for simple comparisons :(
Containers mailing list
Containers at lists.linux-foundation.org
More information about the Devel