From: Geoff Keating <geoffk@cygnus.com>
To: dje@watson.ibm.com
Cc: eek@escape.ca, drow@false.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org,
libc-alpha@sourceware.cygnus.com
Subject: Re: DB_THREAD support in Berkeley DB/glibc
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 16:54:38 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <199912290054.QAA13250@localhost.cygnus.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <199912290015.TAA24316@mal-ach.watson.ibm.com> (message from David Edelsohn on Tue, 28 Dec 1999 19:15:59 -0500)
> Date: Tue, 28 Dec 1999 19:15:59 -0500
> From: David Edelsohn <dje@watson.ibm.com>
You were right about sync being slower than isync. I expect
the difference is caused by sync needing to perform bus operations
where isync does not.
Anyway, they're not substitutes for each other; they do different
things, and in a given situation only one (or, possibly, both in
sequence) will be right.
> If you only are using the TSL_UNSET in the context that one
> already has the lock, then the lwarx/stwcx are unnecessary. What you have
> written, however, is not a general atomic clear macro.
How is it not atomic?
The PUM says "With the exception of double-precision floating-point
accesses on 32-bit implementations, all aligned accesses are atomic."
--
- Geoffrey Keating <geoffk@cygnus.com>
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~1999-12-29 0:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
1999-12-27 3:04 DB_THREAD support in Berkeley DB/glibc Troy Benjegerdes
1999-12-28 7:59 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
1999-12-28 17:53 ` Joel Klecker
1999-12-28 19:02 ` David Edelsohn
1999-12-28 21:22 ` BenH
1999-12-28 22:05 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
1999-12-28 22:28 ` David Edelsohn
1999-12-28 23:21 ` Tony Mantler
1999-12-29 0:15 ` David Edelsohn
1999-12-29 0:54 ` Geoff Keating [this message]
1999-12-29 1:01 ` David Edelsohn
1999-12-28 23:52 ` Geoff Keating
1999-12-29 0:21 ` David Edelsohn
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
1999-05-10 23:59 imac of booting Ben Martz
1999-05-11 8:36 ` Joel Klecker
1999-05-11 15:22 ` David Edelsohn
1999-05-11 16:47 ` Geert Uytterhoeven
1999-05-11 17:44 ` Anyone playing with Darwin 0.2 binary yet? Kevin B. Hendricks
1999-05-11 18:47 ` Nathan Ingersoll
1999-05-11 21:00 ` Roger Ivie
1999-05-11 22:15 ` David A. Gatwood
[not found] ` <v04011701b35e71c158ed@[199.174.98.46]>
1999-05-12 14:50 ` New PPC/Mac features of 2.2.8? Jason Haas
1999-05-12 18:21 ` Matt Porter
1999-05-12 19:41 ` Tom Rini
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=199912290054.QAA13250@localhost.cygnus.com \
--to=geoffk@cygnus.com \
--cc=dje@watson.ibm.com \
--cc=drow@false.org \
--cc=eek@escape.ca \
--cc=libc-alpha@sourceware.cygnus.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.