[Top] [All Lists]

Re: MIPS_ATOMIC_SET again (Re: newest kernel

To: Joe deBlaquiere <>
Subject: Re: MIPS_ATOMIC_SET again (Re: newest kernel
From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 19:19:35 +0200 (MET DST)
Cc: "Kevin D. Kissell" <>,
In-reply-to: <>
Organization: Technical University of Gdansk
On Thu, 24 May 2001, Joe deBlaquiere wrote:

> and those pesky little inlined code snippets...
> #define PT_EI extern inline
> PT_EI long int
> testandset (int *spinlock)
> which of course uses ll/sc if your world is built for _MIPS_ISA >= 

 The glibc's non-inlined _test_and_set() also uses ll/sc, if built for
_MIPS_ISA >= _MIPS_ISA_MIPS2.  We might remove the inline version of
_test_and_set() for _MIPS_ISA == _MIPS_ISA_MIPS1 (I forgot about this one
previously, sorry) from <sys/tas.h>, but at a cost of an additional
function call.  I'm not sure if that's fine performance-wise at this

 However, when I finish my implementation of a _test_and_set() syscall, it
will be perfectly fine and even necessary to remove the inline wrapper for
_MIPS_ISA == _MIPS_ISA_MIPS1 -- the only reason the wrapper is needed now
is the incompatibility of the arguments of sysmips() and _test_and_set(). 
The good news is I already started the implementation -- hopefully it'll
be ready over this weekend and the never-ending discussion about
sysmips(MIPS_ATOMIC_SET) will be over.


+  Maciej W. Rozycki, Technical University of Gdansk, Poland   +
+        e-mail:, PGP key available        +

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