Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 8 Feb 2002 19:06:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 8 Feb 2002 19:06:08 -0500 Received: from adsl-63-194-239-202.dsl.lsan03.pacbell.net ([63.194.239.202]:2543 "EHLO mmp-linux.matchmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 8 Feb 2002 19:05:56 -0500 Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2002 16:05:33 -0800 From: Mike Fedyk To: Alan Cox Cc: linux-kernel Subject: Re: [RFC] New locking primitive for 2.5 Message-ID: <20020209000533.GA372@matchmail.com> Mail-Followup-To: Alan Cox , linux-kernel In-Reply-To: <20020208211628.GC343@mis-mike-wstn> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.27i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Feb 09, 2002 at 12:09:04AM +0000, Alan Cox wrote: > > SMP 486s would need that (if there is such a beast). What point does x86 > > get the 64 bit instructions? If after 586, then it would definitely need a > > spin-lock or some-such in those functions. > > There are SMP 486 class x86 machines that are MP 1.1 compliant. They are > sufficiently rare that I think its quite acceptable to "implement" a > cmpxchg8b macro on 486 as spin_lock_irqsave/blah/spin_unlock_irqrestore. It > would be wrong to cripple the other 99.99% of SMP users > Sorry, I only meant to say that the only question is where the split should be between spin-lock and 64bit instruction... This would be included in the appropriate config option. Mike - 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/