[lkml]   [2006]   [Jan]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [patch 1/2] atomic_add_unless sadness

On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, Nick Piggin wrote:
> For some reason gcc 4 on at least i386 and ppc64 (that I have tested with)
> emit two cmpxchges for atomic_add_unless unless we put branch hints in.
> (it is unlikely for the "unless" case to trigger, and it is unlikely for
> cmpxchg to fail).

Irrelevant. If "atomic_add_unless()" is in a hot path and inlined, we're
doing something else wrong anyway. It's not a good op to use. Just think
of it as being very expensive.

The _only_ user of "atomic_add_unless()" is "dec_and_lock()", which isn't
even inlined. The fact that gcc ends up "unrolling" the loop once is just

Please keep it that way.

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: 2009-11-18 23:46    [W:0.056 / U:5.252 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site