Re: Question about barriers for ARM on tools/perf/
From: Will Deacon
Date: Fri May 08 2015 - 12:45:45 EST
On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 04:27:59PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, May 08, 2015 at 11:57:01AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Em Fri, May 08, 2015 at 03:48:20PM +0100, Will Deacon escreveu:
> > > Do you know what the objection to the intrinsics was? I believe that
> > > the __sync versions are deprecated in favour of the C11-like __atomic
> > > flavours, so if that was all the objection was about then we could use
> > > one or the other depending on what the compiler supports.
> > Peter? Ingo?
> I cannot remember, the __sync things should mostly work I suppose, and
> if you wrap then in the normal atomic interface we don't have to learn
> yet another API.
Yeah, I think that's a good idea.
> That said, I've successfully lifted this kernel code into userspace in
> the past.
Lifting a copy isn't too bad, it's using the same file that worries me.
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/