Messages in this thread | | | From | Keith Owens <> | Subject | Re: [patch] 2.6.6-rc2 Allow architectures to reenable interrupts on contended spinlocks | Date | Tue, 27 Apr 2004 22:05:25 +1000 |
| |
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 21:36:48 +1000, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org> wrote: >I was just thinking yesterday that it would be good to reenable >interrupts during spin_lock_irq on ppc64. I am hacking on the >spinlocks for ppc64 at the moment and this looks like something worth >adding. > >Why not keep _raw_spin_lock as it is and only use _raw_spin_lock_flags >in the spin_lock_irq{,save} case?
Using both _raw_spin_lock and _raw_spin_lock_flags doubles the amount of code to maintain.
Architectures like ia64 that use a common out of line contention path need a common interface for all spinlocks, for the cases with and without irq{,save}.
You can test __builtin_constant_p(flags) and fold out the case of the flags being a known 'no flags available' value to get separate contended paths if that is really what you want. But for architectures that want a common path for all contended locks, you have to start with common code.
- 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/
| |