* Mathieu Desnoyers ([email protected]) wrote:
> > So it is "one cpu may write, other cpus may read", and as big as
> > long. Are you sure obscure architectures (sparc?) can implement this
> > in useful way? ... maybe yes, unless obscure architecture exists where
> > second other cpu can see garbage data when first cpu writes into long
> > ...?
> >
> >
>
> Sparc64 uses a memory barrier around the atomic operations in the SMP case
> (see arch/sparc64/lib/atomic.S). The same is true for sparc. As I am not a sparc
> expert, I left the asm-generic default behavior, but I think it should be safe
> to implement local.S code derived from atomic.S to optimize the speed of the
> local_t operations on sparc and sparc64. Can anyone confirm this ?
>
Sorry for the self reply.. looking at arch/sparc/lib/atomic32.c tells me that
local.h could use its own version that would only disable interrupts without
taking any hashed spinlock.
sparc64 seems to be a saner architecture providing atomic operations wrt the
local CPU. A barrier-free version of arch/sparc64/lib/atomic.S would improve
performance.
Mathieu
--
OpenPGP public key: http://krystal.dyndns.org:8080/key/compudj.gpg
Key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
-
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]
