From: linux@horizon.com
To: nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, torvalds@osdl.org
Cc: linux@horizon.com, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org,
linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] WorkStruct: Implement generic UP cmpxchg() where an
Date: 10 Dec 2006 21:30:54 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20061211023054.2622.qmail@science.horizon.com> (raw)
> Even if ARM is able to handle any arbitrary C code between the
> "load locked" and store conditional API, other architectures can not
> by definition.
Maybe so, but I think you and Linus are missing the middle ground.
While I agree that LL/SC can't be part of the kernel API for people to
get arbitrarily clever with in the device driver du jour, they are *very*
nice abstractions for shrinking the arch-specific code size.
The semantics are widely enough shared that it's quite possible in
practice to write a good set of atomic primitives in terms of LL/SC
and then let most architectures define LL/SC and simply #include the
generic atomic op implementations.
If there's a restriction that would pessimize the generic implementation,
that function can be implemented specially for that arch.
Then implementing things like backoff on contention can involve writing
a whole lot less duplicated code.
Just like you can write a set of helpers for, say, CPUs with physically
addressed caches, even though the "real" API has to be able to handle the
virtually addressed ones, you can write a nice set of helpers for machines
with sane LL/SC.
next reply other threads:[~2006-12-11 2:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-12-11 2:30 linux [this message]
2006-12-11 4:30 ` [PATCH] WorkStruct: Implement generic UP cmpxchg() where an Nick Piggin
2006-12-11 6:17 ` linux
2006-12-11 7:36 ` Nick Piggin
2006-12-12 3:24 ` linux
2006-12-12 10:37 ` David Howells
2006-12-11 4:49 ` Linus Torvalds
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=20061211023054.2622.qmail@science.horizon.com \
--to=linux@horizon.com \
--cc=linux-arch@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.arm.linux.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=torvalds@osdl.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