linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: MIPS_ATOMIC_SET again (Re: newest kernel

To: Jun Sun <jsun@mvista.com>
Subject: Re: MIPS_ATOMIC_SET again (Re: newest kernel
From: Florian Lohoff <flo@rfc822.org>
Date: Wed, 23 May 2001 20:55:53 +0200
Cc: Joe deBlaquiere <jadb@redhat.com>, "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro@ds2.pg.gda.pl>, ralf@oss.sgi.com, Pete Popov <ppopov@mvista.com>, George Gensure <werkt@csh.rit.edu>, linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
In-reply-to: <20010523205412.A10981@paradigm.rfc822.org>; from flo@rfc822.org on Wed, May 23, 2001 at 08:54:12PM +0200
Organization: rfc822 - pure communication
References: <Pine.GSO.3.96.1010523152429.5196A-100000@delta.ds2.pg.gda.pl> <3B0BF7F8.3050306@redhat.com> <3B0C0475.B9ACE682@mvista.com> <20010523205412.A10981@paradigm.rfc822.org>
Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.15i
On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 08:54:12PM +0200, Florian Lohoff wrote:
> My favourit would be to let the glibc on runtime decide whether
> to use sysmips or ll/sc in the atomic test_and_set stuff. This would
> lead to an common atom op in the userspace which is fast on ll/sc 
> cpus and gives much lesser performance penaltys in the sysmips case
> than emulating ll/sc.

But again - I tried to run this discussion again and again - As long
as there is no code to use there is no point in taking a discussion.
I needed a working sysmips for debian as we compile the glibc with
sysmips (performance penalty but for now works everywhere) thus
i fixed the sysmips.

Let the code speak

Flo
-- 
Florian Lohoff                  flo@rfc822.org             +49-5201-669912
     Why is it called "common sense" when nobody seems to have any?


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>