Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 21 Jan 2003 08:13:43 +0100 | From | Manfred Spraul <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH][2.5] smp_call_function_mask |
| |
Alan wrote:
>On Fri, 2003-01-17 at 05:18, Zwane Mwaikambo wrote: >> + /* Wait for response */ >> + while (atomic_read(&data.started) != num_cpus) >> + barrier(); > >Only old old intel x86 that does -bad- things as it >generates a lot of bus locked cycles. Better to do > > while(atomic_read(&data.started) != num_cpus) > while(data.started.value != num_cpus) > { > barrier(); > cpu_relax(); > } > >I would think ? > > > from 2.5.52, <asm-i386/atomic.h> #define atomic_read(v) ((v)->counter) AFAIK atomic_read never contained locked bus cycles.
Btw, Zwane, what about removing non_atomic from the prototype?
-- Manfred
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |