On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 01:40:49PM -0500, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> I am currently creating a "LOCK" prefix free and memory barrier free version
> of atomic.h to fulfill my tracer (LTTng) needs, which is to atomically update
> per-cpu data and have a minimal performance loss.
>
> I just came across the MIPS atomic.h and system.h implementations in 2.6.18
> which brings a question :
>
> Why are the primitives in include/asm-mips/atomic.h using the "sync"
> instruction even in the UP case ? system.h cmpxchg only uses the sync in the
> SMP case.
Why are the standard atomic operations insufficient for your needs?
There is an enormous amout of subtilities in those atomic ops for some
architectures you probably do yourself a big favor by avoiding new
variants.
Ralf
-
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]
