Re: [patch 08/10] SLUB: Optional fast path using cmpxchg_local

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Andrew Morton
Date: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 - 11:49 am

On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 20:32:04 -0700
Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com> wrote:


Let's cc linux-arch: presumably other architectures can implement cpu-local
cmpxchg and would see some benefit from doing so.

The semantics are "atomic wrt interrutps on this cpu, not atomic wrt other
cpus", yes?

Do you have a feel for how useful it would be for arch maintainers to implement
this?  IOW, is it worth their time?

-
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[patch 08/10] SLUB: Optional fast path using cmpxchg_local, Christoph Lameter, (Sat Oct 27, 8:32 pm)
Re: [patch 08/10] SLUB: Optional fast path using cmpxchg_local, Christoph Lameter, (Sun Oct 28, 7:59 pm)
Re: [patch 08/10] SLUB: Optional fast path using cmpxchg_local, Christoph Lameter, (Sun Oct 28, 8:34 pm)
Re: [patch 08/10] SLUB: Optional fast path using cmpxchg_local, Andrew Morton, (Tue Oct 30, 11:49 am)
Re: [patch 08/10] SLUB: Optional fast path using cmpxchg_local, Christoph Lameter, (Tue Oct 30, 11:58 am)
Re: [patch 08/10] SLUB: Optional fast path using cmpxchg_local, Mathieu Desnoyers, (Tue Oct 30, 12:12 pm)
[PATCH] local_t Documentation update 2, Mathieu Desnoyers, (Tue Oct 30, 6:52 pm)
Re: [patch 08/10] SLUB: Optional fast path using cmpxchg_local, Mathieu Desnoyers, (Tue Oct 30, 7:28 pm)