|| ||Linus Torvalds <torvalds-AT-linux-foundation.org> |
|| ||"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa-AT-linux.intel.com> |
|| ||Re: [GIT PULL] x86/spinlocks optional for 3.1 |
|| ||Mon, 1 Aug 2011 14:04:42 -1000|
|| ||"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa-AT-zytor.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo-AT-elte.hu>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge-AT-citrix.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel-AT-vger.kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx-AT-linutronix.de>|
|| ||Article, Thread
On Mon, Aug 1, 2011 at 7:53 AM, H. Peter Anvin <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Sorry for this late pull; testing on this got delayed due to my and
> Ingo's scheduling and the desire to make sure that this would not
> cause a performance regression.
> At this time we have good confidence in it, but if you feel this is
> too late feel free to drop it and we'll do it for 3.2.
Hmm. I don't mind it per se, but I hate how this patch that is meant
to combine the inline asm versions into one C version actually creates
*more* lines, and creates *more* inline asm differences between
x86-32/64 due to the xadd.
So quite frankly, I think the patch in this form is totally
self-defeating. I'm not pulling something that is supposed to clean
things up, but just adds more ugliness in some other place.
If that xadd implementation could perhaps be shared, I wouldn't hate
it so much. As it is, I really don't see the point in pulling this.
to post comments)