[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] lib: Provide generic atomic64_t implementation
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Jun 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>> On Sat, 13 Jun 2009, Paul Mackerras wrote:
>>> Linus, Andrew: OK if this goes in via the powerpc tree?
>> Ok by me.
> Btw, do 32-bit architectures really necessarily want 64-bit performance
> counters?
> I realize that 32-bit counters will overflow pretty easily, but I do
> wonder about the performance impact of doing things like hashed spinlocks
> for 64-bit counters. Maybe the downsides of 64-bit perf counters on such
> architectures might outweight the upsides?

An alternative implementation using 64-bit cmpxchg will recover most of
the costs of hashed spinlocks. I assume most serious 32-bit
architectures have them?

error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function

 \ /
  Last update: 2009-06-14 13:55    [W:0.052 / U:6.572 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site