mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Keith Owens <kaos@sgi.com>
To: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Cc: Linux Kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] 2.6.6-rc2 Allow architectures to reenable interrupts on contended spinlocks
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 22:05:25 +1000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2300.1083067525@ocs3.ocs.com.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 27 Apr 2004 21:36:48 +1000." <16526.17872.872703.799153@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com>

On Tue, 27 Apr 2004 21:36:48 +1000, 
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org> wrote:
>I was just thinking yesterday that it would be good to reenable
>interrupts during spin_lock_irq on ppc64.  I am hacking on the
>spinlocks for ppc64 at the moment and this looks like something worth
>adding.
>
>Why not keep _raw_spin_lock as it is and only use _raw_spin_lock_flags
>in the spin_lock_irq{,save} case?

Using both _raw_spin_lock and _raw_spin_lock_flags doubles the amount
of code to maintain.

Architectures like ia64 that use a common out of line contention path
need a common interface for all spinlocks, for the cases with and
without irq{,save}.

You can test __builtin_constant_p(flags) and fold out the case of the
flags being a known 'no flags available' value to get separate
contended paths if that is really what you want.  But for architectures
that want a common path for all contended locks, you have to start with
common code.


  reply	other threads:[~2004-04-27 12:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-04-27  1:59 Keith Owens
2004-04-27  4:49 ` Andrew Morton
2004-04-27  5:19   ` Keith Owens
2004-04-27  6:54 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2004-04-27  7:45   ` Keith Owens
2004-04-27 11:36     ` Paul Mackerras
2004-04-27 12:05       ` Keith Owens [this message]
2004-04-27 12:33         ` Christoph Hellwig
2004-04-27 16:01 ` Linus Torvalds
2004-04-28  3:29   ` [patch] 2.6.6-rc3 " Keith Owens
2004-04-30  7:07     ` Andrew Morton

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=2300.1083067525@ocs3.ocs.com.au \
    --to=kaos@sgi.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox

Powered by JetHome