From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: (from majordomo@localhost)
	by oss.sgi.com (8.11.2/8.11.3) id g154pJC11848
	for linux-mips-outgoing; Mon, 4 Feb 2002 20:51:19 -0800
Received: from nevyn.them.org (mail@NEVYN.RES.CMU.EDU [128.2.145.6])
	by oss.sgi.com (8.11.2/8.11.3) with SMTP id g154pFA11845
	for <linux-mips@oss.sgi.com>; Mon, 4 Feb 2002 20:51:15 -0800
Received: from drow by nevyn.them.org with local (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian))
	id 16XxVe-0001rD-00; Mon, 04 Feb 2002 23:47:10 -0500
Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2002 23:47:10 -0500
From: Daniel Jacobowitz <dan@debian.org>
To: "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org>
Cc: Dominic Sweetman <dom@algor.co.uk>,
   GNU C Library <libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com>, linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: PATCH: Fix ll/sc for mips (take 3)
Message-ID: <20020204234710.A7094@nevyn.them.org>
Mail-Followup-To: "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org>,
	Dominic Sweetman <dom@algor.co.uk>,
	GNU C Library <libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com>,
	linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
References: <1012676003.1563.6.camel@xyzzy.stargate.net> <20020202120354.A1522@lucon.org> <mailpost.1012680250.7159@news-sj1-1> <yov5ofj65elj.fsf@broadcom.com> <15454.22661.855423.532827@gladsmuir.algor.co.uk> <20020204083115.C13384@lucon.org> <15454.47823.837119.847975@gladsmuir.algor.co.uk> <20020204172857.A22337@lucon.org> <20020204215804.A2095@nevyn.them.org> <20020204204247.A25254@lucon.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20020204204247.A25254@lucon.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i
Sender: owner-linux-mips@oss.sgi.com
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 08:42:47PM -0800, H . J . Lu wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 04, 2002 at 09:58:04PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
> > 
> > > --- libc/linuxthreads/sysdeps/mips/pspinlock.c.llsc	Mon Feb  4 13:45:01 2002
> > > +++ libc/linuxthreads/sysdeps/mips/pspinlock.c	Mon Feb  4 17:09:02 2002
> > > @@ -40,7 +40,7 @@ __pthread_spin_lock (pthread_spinlock_t 
> > >       "bnez	%1,1b\n\t"
> > >       " li	%2,1\n\t"
> > >       "sc	%2,%0\n\t"
> > > -     "beqzl	%2,1b\n\t"
> > > +     "beqz	%2,1b\n\t"
> > >       " ll	%1,%3\n\t"
> > >       ".set	pop"
> > >       : "=m" (*lock), "=&r" (tmp1), "=&r" (tmp2)
> > 
> > Is that really what you meant to do?  The ll is now in the delay slot
> > of the beqz.
> 
> Yes, it is ok since we don't care what ll does if the branch is not
> taken.

Won't this cause some gratuitous thrashing if someone else is trying to
get the spinlock at the same time?

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz                           Carnegie Mellon University
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer