lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Dec]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [RFC 1/6] Framework
    > >With local_t you don't need to turn off interrupts
    > >anymore.
    > >
    >
    > Then you can't use __local_xxx, and so many architectures will use
    > atomic instructions (the ones who don't are the ones with tripled
    > cacheline footprint of this structure).

    They are wrong then. atomic instructions is the wrong implementation
    and they would be better off with asm-generic.

    If anything they should use per_cpu counters for interrupts and
    use seq locks. Or just turn off the interrupts for a short time
    in the low level code.

    >
    > Sure i386 and x86-64 are happy, but this would probably slow down
    > most other architectures.

    I think it is better to fix the other architectures then - if they
    are really using a full scale bus lock for this they're just wrong.

    I don't think it is a good idea to do a large change in generic
    code just for dumb low level code.

    -Andi
    -
    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-12-12 05:54    [W:2.147 / U:1.320 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site