Bruce Momjian wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
He is uncomfortable with the port/*.h changes at this point, so it seems
I am going to have to add Itanium/Opteron tests to most of those files.
Why don't you try to put together a proposed patch of that kind, and
then we can look to see how big and ugly it is compared to the other?
If the alternative is shown to be really messy, that would sway my
opinion, maybe Marc's too.
OK, here is an Opteron/Itanium patch that might work. I say "might"
because I don't have a lot of confidence in the current spinlock
detection code. There is an uncoupling between the definition of
HAS_TEST_AND_SET, the data type used by slock_t, and the assembler code.
Is the Itanium tas implementation correct? I think it should be
xchg4.aqv instead of just xchg4 - as far as I know a normal atomic
exchange is is not a memory barrier on Itanium. At least the Linux
kernel version contains "cmpxchg4.aqv".
--
Manfred
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate
subscribe-nomail command to [EMAIL PROTECTED] so that your
message can get through to the mailing list cleanly
