Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 25 Feb 2011 15:09:26 +0200 | From | Pekka Enberg <> | Subject | Re: [cpuops cmpxchg double V2 1/4] Generic support for this_cpu_cmpxchg_double |
| |
On Fri, Jan 21, 2011 at 09:13:41AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >>> We could do cmpxchg with a structure... the problem with a lon int >>> type is that Cristoph ran into bugs with __int128 on 64 bits.
On 01/21/2011 09:19 AM, Tejun Heo wrote: >> But, IIRC, the problem with int128 was with passing it as parameter >> and return value. We don't have to do that. We'll be just using it >> as a data storage / container type. Or even that is broken?
On 1/24/11 8:01 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > Well, part of the point was to pass in registers. > > No idea on the data storage type.
Ping? The current situation is that we're unable to merge a perfectly good SLUB performance optimization because we can't seem to agree on the this_cpu_cmpxchg_double() API.
Pekka
| |