On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 06:54:48AM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote: > > Argh! > > > > Andrew, please drop that patch. And the x86 out-of-line of > > __atomic_add_unless(). > > Why dropping the second? Do you have something better?
The try_cmpxchg() patches save about half the text, and do not have the out-of-line penalty as shown here: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20170322165144.dtidvvbxey7w5...@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net > On the first there were no 0day regressions, so at least basic performance > checking has been done. The first is superseded by much better patches in the scheduler tree.
