[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:0.022 / U:2.064 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site