Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 7 Mar 2006 22:55:56 -0800 | From | Andrew Morton <> | Subject | Re: [patch] i386 spinlocks: disable interrupts only if we enabled them |
| |
Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 01:43:08AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > we dont inline that code anymore. So i think the optimization is fine. > > Why is that? It adds memory traffic that has to be synchronized > before the lock occurs and clobbered registers now in the caller.
Is the inlined lock;decb+jns likely to worsen the text size? I doubt it. Overall text will get bigger due to the out-of-line stuff, but that's OK.
I'm sure we went over all this, but I don't recall the thinking. - 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/
| |