lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2007]   [Jun]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRE: volatile and atomic_t/spinlock_t
Date
From
> So is
>
> while (__raw_spin_is_locked(&v));
>
> supposed to work? Or should that be
>
> while (__raw_spin_is_locked(&v))
> cpu_relax();
>
> as well and all the volatiles can/should go away?

cpu_relax() is a really good idea in every spinloop on
hyper-threaded cores. It lets the h/w know that we aren't
doing anything useful here, so resources and power can be
diverted to other threads sharing the core.

Avoiding the need for volatile or other compiler optimizer
defeating tricks is a side benefit.

-Tony
-
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: 2007-06-05 20:41    [W:0.059 / U:0.072 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site