[lkml]   [2002]   [Feb]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC] New locking primitive for 2.5
On Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 12:09:04AM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > SMP 486s would need that (if there is such a beast). What point does x86
> > get the 64 bit instructions? If after 586, then it would definitely need a
> > spin-lock or some-such in those functions.
> There are SMP 486 class x86 machines that are MP 1.1 compliant. They are
> sufficiently rare that I think its quite acceptable to "implement" a
> cmpxchg8b macro on 486 as spin_lock_irqsave/blah/spin_unlock_irqrestore. It
> would be wrong to cripple the other 99.99% of SMP users

Sorry, I only meant to say that the only question is where the split should
be between spin-lock and 64bit instruction...

This would be included in the appropriate config option.

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

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:18    [W:0.153 / U:3.960 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site