lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jun]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1 of 4] mm: add a ptep_modify_prot transaction abstraction
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, 18 Jun 2008, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>
>> Along the lines of:
>>
>
> Hell no. There's a reason we have a special set_wrprotect() thing. We can
> do it more efficiently on native hardware by just clearing the bit
> atomically. No need to do the cmpxchg games.
>

It's not cmpxchg, just xchg.

In other words, is:

lock btr $_PAGE_BIT_RW, (%rbx)

much cheaper than

mov $0, %rax
xchg %rax, (%rbx)
and $~_PAGE_RW, %rax
mov %rax, (%rbx)

?

It's the same number of locked RMW operations, so aside from being a few
instructions longer, I think it would be much the same.

I guess the correct answer is "lmbench".

J


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-06-19 02:41    [W:0.148 / U:0.064 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site