On Tuesday 29 August 2006 12:05, David Howells wrote:
>Because i386 (and x86_64) can do better by using XADDL/XADDQ.
x86-64 has always used the spinlock based version.
> On i386, CMPXCHG also ties you to what registers you may use for what to some
> extent.
We've completely given up these kinds of micro optimization for spinlocks,
which are 1000x as critical as rwsems. And nobody was able to benchmark
a difference.
It is very very likely nobody could benchmark a difference on rwsems either.
While I'm sure it's an interesting intellectual exercise to do these
advanced rwsems it would be better for everybody else to go for a single
maintainable C implementation.
-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
