Re: [rfc 00/45] [RFC] CPU ops and a rework of per cpu data handlingon x86_64

[Christoph Lameter]

On Mon, 19 Nov 2007, David Miller wrote:

> Although we have a per-cpu area base in a fixed global register
> for addressing, the above isn't beneficial on sparc64 because
> the atomic is much slower than doing a:
> 
> 	local_irq_disable();
> 	nonatomic_percpu_memory_op();
> 	local_irq_enable();
> 
> local_irq_{disable,enable}() together is about 18 cycles.
> Just the cmpxchg() part of the atomic sequence is at least
> 32 cycles and requires a loop:
> 
> 	while (1) {
> 		x = ld();
> 		if (cmpxchg(x, op(x)))
> 			break;
> 	}
> 
> which bloats up the atomic version even more.

In that case the generic fallbacks can just provide what you already have.

-
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/