lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2008]   [Jun]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/3] 64-bit futexes: Intro

* Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:

> > That bit can be used as a lock and if all access to the state of
> > that atomic variable uses it, arbitrary higher-order atomic state
> > transitions can be derived from it. The cost would be a bit more
> > instructions in the fastpath, but there would still only be a single
> > atomic op (the acquire op), as the unlock would be a natural barrier
> > (on x86 at least).
>
> No, "unlocks as a natural barrier" only works for exclusive kernel
> locks (spin_unlock and write_unlock). There we can just do a write to
> unlock. But for anything that wants to handle contention differently
> than just spinning, the unlock path needs to be able to do an atomic
> "unlock and test if I need to do something else", because it may need
> to wake things up.

yeah, indeed. Compared to all the other costs that have to be dealt with
here, having a second atomic op isnt all that much of an issue either,
especially on latest hw. An atomic op will probably never be as cheap as
a non-atomic op, but ~20 cycles is still plenty fast for most practical
purposes.

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2008-06-03 01:07    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans