From: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
To: Jes Sorensen <jes@linuxcare.com>
Cc: Ion Badulescu <ionut@cs.columbia.edu>,
Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com>,
Alan Cox <alan@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Donald Becker <becker@scyld.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] starfire reads irq before pci_enable_device.
Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2001 15:48:49 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3A8554D1.96ED1238@colorfullife.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0102081259090.31024-100000@age.cs.columbia.edu> <3A831313.A23EE2A1@colorfullife.com> <d38znfwmzq.fsf@lxplus015.cern.ch>
Hi Jes,
I read through your acenic driver and noticed that you replaced
spinlocks with bitops.
Is that a good idea? I always avoid bitops and replace them with
spinlocks:
* On uniprocessor they are obviously slower.
* on SMP i386 spin_lock() / spin_unlock() is faster than
test_and_set_bit()/clear_bit(): the spinlock operations have a
direction, and thus no memory barrier is required in spin_unlock,
Intel's default memory ordering is sufficient. clear_bit() doesn't know
that it will be used to end a protected area, thus it needs a full
memory barrier.
* on ia64 spinlocks are probably faster, and it seems that clear_bit()
instead of spin_unlock() might even cause races:
spin_unlock() needs a 'release' memory barrier, but clear_bit() contains
an 'acquire' memory barrier.
I only see 2 advantages for bitops:
* you can avoid disabling local interrupts in hard_tx_xmit() or other
bottom half handlers, but often you only need the disabled interrupts
for a few instructions.
* you won't spin - but spinning should be rare, or you can use
spin_trylock().
--
Manfred
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-02-10 14:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-02-07 19:52 [PATCH] starfire reads irq before pci_enable_device davej
2001-02-07 19:57 ` Jeff Garzik
2001-02-07 20:34 ` Manfred Spraul
2001-02-08 4:00 ` Jeff Garzik
2001-02-08 1:52 ` Ion Badulescu
2001-02-08 20:28 ` Jeff Garzik
2001-02-08 21:18 ` Ion Badulescu
2001-02-08 21:38 ` Jeff Garzik
2001-02-08 22:05 ` Ion Badulescu
2001-02-09 19:08 ` Jeff Garzik
2001-02-09 20:07 ` Ion Badulescu
2001-02-09 20:11 ` Jeff Garzik
2001-02-09 20:21 ` Ion Badulescu
2001-02-09 20:26 ` Jeff Garzik
2001-02-08 21:43 ` Manfred Spraul
2001-02-08 21:46 ` Ion Badulescu
2001-02-09 21:43 ` Jes Sorensen
2001-02-09 21:52 ` Ion Badulescu
2001-02-12 18:54 ` Jes Sorensen
2001-02-14 1:35 ` Ion Badulescu
2001-02-10 14:48 ` Manfred Spraul [this message]
2001-02-08 21:26 ` Donald Becker
2001-02-08 22:16 ` Ion Badulescu
2001-02-09 0:09 ` Ion Badulescu
2001-02-09 0:44 ` Donald Becker
2001-02-09 0:47 ` Ion Badulescu
2001-02-09 10:49 ` Alan Cox
2001-02-09 23:32 ` Ion Badulescu
2001-02-09 23:35 ` Alan Cox
2001-02-10 8:48 ` Gérard Roudier
2001-02-12 19:01 ` Jes Sorensen
2001-02-13 13:06 ` Jeff Garzik
2001-02-13 20:29 ` Ion Badulescu
2001-02-14 2:05 ` Ion Badulescu
2001-02-14 20:10 ` Gérard Roudier
2001-02-14 15:39 ` Jes Sorensen
2001-02-17 21:34 ` David S. Miller
2001-02-19 11:00 ` Jes Sorensen
2001-02-09 21:42 ` Jes Sorensen
2001-02-09 22:56 ` Donald Becker
2001-02-12 18:54 ` Jes Sorensen
2001-02-14 1:20 ` Donald Becker
2001-02-14 12:37 ` Alan Cox
2001-02-14 12:49 ` Jeff Garzik
2001-02-14 12:54 ` Ion Badulescu
2001-02-14 13:05 ` Alan Cox
2001-02-14 13:38 ` Ion Badulescu
2001-02-14 15:35 ` Jes Sorensen
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2001-02-14 16:54 Petr Vandrovec
2001-02-15 16:09 ` Jes Sorensen
2001-02-07 18:42 davej
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=3A8554D1.96ED1238@colorfullife.com \
--to=manfred@colorfullife.com \
--cc=alan@redhat.com \
--cc=becker@scyld.com \
--cc=ionut@cs.columbia.edu \
--cc=jes@linuxcare.com \
--cc=jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.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