On Aug 12 2007 10:54, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
>Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 10:54:35 -0400
>From: Mathieu Desnoyers <[email protected]>
>To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
>Cc: Christoph Lameter <[email protected]>,
> Mathieu Desnoyers <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
>Subject: [patch 01/23] Fall back on interrupt disable in cmpxchg8b on 80386 and
> 80486
>
>Actually, on 386, cmpxchg and cmpxchg_local fall back on
>cmpxchg_386_u8/16/32: it disables interruptions around non atomic
>updates to mimic the cmpxchg behavior.
>
>The comment:
>/* Poor man's cmpxchg for 386. Unsuitable for SMP */
>
>already present in cmpxchg_386_u32 tells much about how this cmpxchg
>implementation should not be used in a SMP context. However, the cmpxchg_local
>can perfectly use this fallback, since it only needs to be atomic wrt the local
>cpu.
>
>This patch adds a cmpxchg_486_u64 and uses it as a fallback for cmpxchg64
>and cmpxchg64_local on 80386 and 80486.
hm, but why is it called cmpxchg_486 when the other functions are called
cmpxchg_386?
Jan
--
-
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]
