Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 12 Jan 2002 02:53:21 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 12 Jan 2002 02:53:12 -0500 Received: from neon-gw-l3.transmeta.com ([63.209.4.196]:13324 "EHLO neon-gw.transmeta.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 12 Jan 2002 02:53:08 -0500 To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: "H. Peter Anvin" Subject: Re: [Q] Looking for an emulation for CMOV* instructions. Date: 11 Jan 2002 23:52:50 -0800 Organization: Transmeta Corporation, Santa Clara CA Message-ID: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Disclaimer: Not speaking for Transmeta in any way, shape, or form. Copyright: Copyright 2002 H. Peter Anvin - All Rights Reserved Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Followup to: By author: Andi Kleen In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel > > One corner case where emulation would IMHO make sense would be CMPXCHG8. > It would allow to do efficient inline mutexes in pthreads, and hit the > emulation only on 386/486. cpu feature flag checking is unfortunately > not an option normally for inline code. > You don't need CMPXCHG8B to do efficient inline mutexes. In fact, the pthreads code for i386 uses the same mutexes the kernel does (LOCK INC based, I believe), complete with section hacking to make them efficiently inlinable -- and then they're put inside a function call. I believe "kill me now" is an appropriate response. -hpa -- at work, in private! "Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot." http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt - 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/