[lkml]   [2010]   [Nov]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [thiscpuops upgrade 10/10] Lockless (and preemptless) fastpaths for slub
On Tue, 23 Nov 2010, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:

> Ah! I knew I was missing something: the second cmpxchg will fail because it
> expects "tid", but the value is now the "next_tid". So effectively, many
> instances of the same transaction can run concurrently, but only one will
> succeed.


> Sorry for the noise.

No its good to hear that you were not able to find a hole on first glance.

 \ /
  Last update: 2010-11-24 04:13    [W:0.056 / U:3.008 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site