lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Dec]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC 1/6] Framework
> >With local_t you don't need to turn off interrupts
> >anymore.
> >
>
> Then you can't use __local_xxx, and so many architectures will use
> atomic instructions (the ones who don't are the ones with tripled
> cacheline footprint of this structure).

They are wrong then. atomic instructions is the wrong implementation
and they would be better off with asm-generic.

If anything they should use per_cpu counters for interrupts and
use seq locks. Or just turn off the interrupts for a short time
in the low level code.

>
> Sure i386 and x86-64 are happy, but this would probably slow down
> most other architectures.

I think it is better to fix the other architectures then - if they
are really using a full scale bus lock for this they're just wrong.

I don't think it is a good idea to do a large change in generic
code just for dumb low level code.

-Andi
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-12-12 05:54    [W:0.518 / U:0.252 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site