[lkml]   [1999]   [Nov]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [patch] new spinlock variant, spinlock-2.3.30-A4
    Tuesday, November 30, 1999 10:50 PM
    Ingo Molnar <> wrote :

    > yes, true. Keep in mind that this only affects the slow path. The above
    > spinlock would be implemented as a function anyway (we do not want to
    > inline it), and in that case the slow path can eg. use queued spinlocks
    > (spinlock chains through on-stack variables) or exponential backoff, or
    > whatever technique.

    OK, I've misunderstood that the code You suggested was a replacement of the
    "lock" one
    while this is only a fast test, failing it CPUs falls executing the "lock"


    "Debian, the Freedom in Freedom."

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:55    [W:0.020 / U:3.280 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site