Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750901AbVJQHEf (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Oct 2005 03:04:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932066AbVJQHEf (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Oct 2005 03:04:35 -0400 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:17053 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750901AbVJQHEe (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Oct 2005 03:04:34 -0400 Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 00:03:43 -0700 From: Andrew Morton To: Eric Dumazet Cc: torvalds@osdl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH] i386 spinlocks should use the full 32 bits, not only 8 bits Message-Id: <20051017000343.782d46fc.akpm@osdl.org> In-Reply-To: <434BEA0D.9010802@cosmosbay.com> References: <200510110007_MC3-1-AC4C-97EA@compuserve.com> <1129035658.23677.46.camel@localhost.localdomain> <434BDB1C.60105@cosmosbay.com> <434BEA0D.9010802@cosmosbay.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.4 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 798 Lines: 25 Eric Dumazet wrote: > > 2) The unlock sequence is not anymore inlined. It appears twice or three times > in the kernel. Is that intentional though? With my mm/swapfile.i has an unreferenced static inline void __raw_spin_unlock(raw_spinlock_t *lock) { __asm__ __volatile__( "movb $1,%0" :"=m" (lock->slock) : : "memory" ); } which either a) shouldn't be there or b) should be referenced. Ingo, can you confirm that x86's spin_unlock is never inlined? If so, what's my __raw_spin_unlock() doing there? - 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/