lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Dec]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: spinlock
From
Date
Marc Lehmann <pcg@opengroup.org> writes:
> On Wed, Dec 01, 1999 at 11:56:56PM +0000, David Wragg
> <dpw@doc.ic.ac.uk> wrote:
> > It might seem like I'm harping on about the C standard. It's not
> >directly relevant to gcc as it is used in kernel programming, but it
> >does constrain the gcc developers, so it can be useful for predicting
>
> The conclusion from the gcc developers was that this property (single
> instruction) is quite useless in practise (you can't guarantee it
> under most circumstances), and it is not too useful either (e.g. smp).

Oh, I wasn't talking about the single instruction thing, except to say
that the standard doesn't require it. In the quoted text, was trying
to refer back to some of my earlier comments; sorry if that was
unclear.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:55    [W:0.193 / U:0.184 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site