From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1NjVpi-0001UX-Eo
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 05:48:10 -0500
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=35269 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NjVph-0001UP-FW
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 05:48:09 -0500
Received: from Debian-exim by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim
	4.60) (envelope-from <av1474@comtv.ru>) id 1NjVpg-0006lF-1r
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 05:48:09 -0500
Received: from fe01x03-cgp.akado.ru ([77.232.31.164]:57699 helo=akado.ru)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <av1474@comtv.ru>) id 1NjVpf-0006kj-Ko
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 22 Feb 2010 05:48:07 -0500
Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2010 13:47:50 +0300 (MSK)
From: malc <av1474@comtv.ru>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 1/2] Detect and use GCC atomic builtins for
	locking
In-Reply-To: <20100222102539.GA4901@bee.dooz.org>
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1002221347270.5110@linmac>
References: <1266613360-23069-1-git-send-email-lool@dooz.org>
	<alpine.LNX.2.00.1002200036500.7525@linmac>
	<20100220081625.GA9788@bee.dooz.org>
	<alpine.LNX.2.00.1002201125150.17666@linmac>
	<20100220091037.GC9788@bee.dooz.org>
	<alpine.LNX.2.00.1002202055001.1540@linmac>
	<20100222102539.GA4901@bee.dooz.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Lo=EFc_Minier?= <lool@dooz.org>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Mon, 22 Feb 2010, Lo?c Minier wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 20, 2010, malc wrote:
> > No, i'm against using locking GCC builtins for all the other targets (well
> > PPC)
> 
>  Do you have benchmarks with/without GCC atomic builtins?

No.

-- 
mailto:av1474@comtv.ru