lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Aug]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 00/18] x86: Ticket lock + cmpxchg cleanup
On 08/24/2011 04:21 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 4:09 PM, Linus Torvalds
> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>> However, the reason I disagree with it is that I don't think that it's
>> any prettier at all to have the two barriers than it is to just have
>> the asm.
> .. and btw, we probably do need *both* barriers. We definitely need
> the one before. The one after is a bit less obvious, since it is
> technically legal for code to move into the locked region. However,
> it's not necessarily a *good* idea for code to move into the locked
> region, so the two barriers are likely the RightThing(tm).

Originally I left the second barrier off for that reason, but I got
mysterious lockups. The second barrier fixed them, so I never got
around to do a full root-cause analysis.

I still think the C version is more straightforward given that the asm
version is confused with the details of the ticket sizes, etc. But,
shrug, its a pretty minor detail.

The OOSTORE stuff is a complete red herring; I bet its been *years*
since someone specifically compiled a kernel with OOSTORE SMP support
because they actually wanted to use it.

J


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-08-25 01:33    [W:0.149 / U:1.292 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site