>On Fri, 2003-01-17 at 05:18, Zwane Mwaikambo wrote:
>> + /* Wait for response */
>> + while (atomic_read(&data.started) != num_cpus)
>> + barrier();
>Only old old intel x86 that does -bad- things as it
>generates a lot of bus locked cycles. Better to do
> while(atomic_read(&data.started) != num_cpus)
> while(data.started.value != num_cpus)
>I would think ?
from 2.5.52, <asm-i386/atomic.h>
#define atomic_read(v) ((v)->counter)
AFAIK atomic_read never contained locked bus cycles.
Btw, Zwane, what about removing non_atomic from the prototype?
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to email@example.com More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jan 23 2003 - 22:00:26 EST