Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Sat, 17 Dec 2005 02:35:05 +1100 | | From | Nick Piggin <> | | Subject | Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation |
| |
Linh Dang wrote:
>>Do you now see what I mean? (yup, ARM is a llsc architecture.) > > > Well, it may be true for ARM but for ppc (i dunno what exactly llsc > means but someone in the thread put ppc in llsc group) it's: >
load locked or load with lock, IIRC.
> loop: > load-reserve foo => old > new = old * N > store-conditional new => foo > if failed goto loop >
The point is that the typical use case for a cmpxchg is less optimal if cmpxchg is simulated with llsc than if the same functionality were directly implemented with llsc instructions.
-- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
- 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/
|  |