Re: [patch] i386 spinlocks: disable interrupts only if we enabledthem

[Andrew Morton]

Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 01:43:08AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>  > we dont inline that code anymore. So i think the optimization is fine.
> 
>  Why is that?  It adds memory traffic that has to be synchronized 
>  before the lock occurs and clobbered registers now in the caller.

Is the inlined lock;decb+jns likely to worsen the text size?  I doubt it. 
Overall text will get bigger due to the out-of-line stuff, but that's OK.

I'm sure we went over all this, but I don't recall the thinking.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/