On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 1:06 PM, Will Deacon <will.dea...@arm.com> wrote:
> The cmpxchg() function tends not to support 64-bit arguments on 32-bit
> architectures. This could be either due to use of unsigned long arguments
> (like on ARM) or lack of instruction support (cmpxchgq on x86). However,
> these architectures may implement a specific cmpxchg64() function to
> provide 64-bit cmpxchg support instead
I'm certainly ok with this, but I wonder how much point there is to
use the cmpxchg alternatives for 32-bit architectures at all...
>From a performance standpoint, lockref really is expected to mainly
help with big machines. Only insane people would do big machines with
32-bit kernels these days.
Of course, it may be that cmpxchg is actually faster on some
architectures, but at least on x86-32, cmpxchg8b is traditionally
quite slow.
In other words, I'd actually like to see some numbers if there are
loads where this actually helps and matters...
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
