[lkml]   [2002]   [Feb]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC] New locking primitive for 2.5
    On Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 12:09:04AM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
    > > SMP 486s would need that (if there is such a beast). What point does x86
    > > get the 64 bit instructions? If after 586, then it would definitely need a
    > > spin-lock or some-such in those functions.
    > There are SMP 486 class x86 machines that are MP 1.1 compliant. They are
    > sufficiently rare that I think its quite acceptable to "implement" a
    > cmpxchg8b macro on 486 as spin_lock_irqsave/blah/spin_unlock_irqrestore. It
    > would be wrong to cripple the other 99.99% of SMP users

    Sorry, I only meant to say that the only question is where the split should
    be between spin-lock and 64bit instruction...

    This would be included in the appropriate config option.

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:18    [W:0.021 / U:2.864 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site