![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Tue, 2007-07-24 at 17:55 -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote: > >>If you want to use bitops as spinlocks you should rather be using >><linux/bit_spinlock.h>. That also does the right thing w.r.t. >>pre-emption and sparse locking annotations. > > > Heh, I didn't know about those... A bit annoying that I can't override > them in the arch, I might be able to save a barrier or two here. Our I guess the test_and_set_bit_lock / clear_bit_unlock will allow you to override them in a way. The big performance problem I see on my powerpc system is not the bit spinlocks (open-coded or not), but the bit sleep locks. Anyway, I'll finally send out the lock bitops patches again today... -- SUSE Labs, Novell Inc. - 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: 2007-07-25 06:13 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||