From: Andi Kleen <ak@suse.de>
To: Christoph Lameter <clameter@sgi.com>
Subject: Re: Why Semaphore Hardware-Dependent?
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 23:39:08 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.3
Cc: Dong Feng <middle.fengdong@gmail.com>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
References: <a2ebde260608271222x2b51693fnaa600965fcfaa6d2@mail.gmail.com> <200608272252.48946.ak@suse.de> <Pine.LNX.4.64.0608271404260.22510@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0608271404260.22510@schroedinger.engr.sgi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200608272339.08092.ak@suse.de>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 878
Lines: 21

On Sunday 27 August 2006 23:05, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Aug 2006, Andi Kleen wrote:
> 
> > rwsems don't -- there are two flavours: a generic spinlock'ed one and a 
> > complicated atomic based one that only works on some architectures. 
> > As far as I know nobody has demonstrated a clear performance increase
> > from the first so it might be possible to switch all to the generic
> > implementation.
> 
> Yup that would be the major issue.I'd be interested to see some tests in 
> that area.

x86-64 always uses the spinlocked version (vs i386 using the atomic one)
and I haven't heard of anybody complaining.

-Andi
-
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/