lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Apr]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 0/5] locking: Introduce local{,64}_try_cmpxchg
From
On 4/5/23 07:17, Uros Bizjak wrote:
> Add generic and target specific support for local{,64}_try_cmpxchg
> and wire up support for all targets that use local_t infrastructure.

I feel like I'm missing some context.

What are the actual end user visible effects of this series? Is there a
measurable decrease in perf overhead? Why go to all this trouble for
perf? Who else will use local_try_cmpxchg()?

I'm all for improving things, and perf is an important user. But, if
the goal here is improving performance, it would be nice to see at least
a stab at quantifying the performance delta.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-04-05 18:38    [W:0.311 / U:2.156 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site