Re: Locking comment on shrink_caches()

From: David S. Miller (
Date: Wed Sep 26 2001 - 18:26:55 EST

   From: Linus Torvalds <>
   Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2001 10:25:18 -0700 (PDT)

   On Wed, 26 Sep 2001, Alan Cox wrote:
> >
> > Your Athlons may handle exclusive cache line acquisition more
> > efficiently (due to memory subsystem performance) but it still
> > does cost something.
> On an exclusive line on Athlon a lock cycle is near enough free, its
> just an ordering constraint. Since the line is in E state no other bus
> master can hold a copy in cache so the atomicity is there. Ditto for newer
> Intel processors
   You misunderstood the problem, I think: when the line moves from one CPU
   to the other (the exclusive state moves along with it), that is

Yes, this was my intended point. Please see my quoted text above and
note the "exclusive cache line acquisition" with emphasis on the word
"acquisition" meaning you don't have the cache line in E state yet.

Franks a lot,
David S. Miller
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Sep 30 2001 - 21:00:52 EST