On Thu, Aug 16, 2001 at 12:14:23PM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote:
> Problem with this approach is that it doesn't prevent the linker
> from placing other data in the same cacheline as the aligned
> lock, at higher addresses.
that was partly intentional, but ok we can be more aggressive on that
side ;).
> Juergen, I'd suggest you dust off that patch, add the conditionals
> which make it a no-op on uniprocessor and submit it. It's such a
agreed, btw it is just a noop on up but it is undefined for __GNUC__ >
2, also it would be nice if he could do it in linux/ instead of asm/, it
should not need special arch trick (spinlock_t and SMP_CACHE_SIZE are
the only thing it needs).
Andrea
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
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 Aug 23 2001 - 21:00:19 EST