Thread (209 messages) 209 messages, 31 authors, 2005-12-22

Re: [PATCH 1/19] MUTEX: Introduce simple mutex implementation

From: Nick Piggin <hidden>
Date: 2005-12-14 01:00:34
Also in: lkml

David Howells wrote:
Nick Piggin [off-list ref] wrote:

quoted
We have atomic_cmpxchg. Can you use that for a sufficient generic
implementation?

No. CMPXCHG/CAS is not as available as XCHG, and it's also unnecessary.
atomic_cmpxchg should be available on all platforms.

While it may be strictly unnecessary, if it can be used to avoid
having a crappy default implementation that requires it to be
reimplemented in all architectures then that would be a good thing.

Any arguments about bad scalability or RT behaviour of the hashed
spinlock emulation atomic_t implementations are silly because they
are used by all atomic_ operations. It is an arch implementation
detail that generic code should not have to worry about.

-- 
SUSE Labs, Novell Inc.

Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com 
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help