Re: [PATCH 0/4] i386 - pte update optimizations

[Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 771 bytes --]

Zachary Amsden a écrit :
> 
> Yes.  Even then, last time I clocked instructions, xchg was still slower 
> than read / write, although I could be misremembering.  And it's not 
> totally clear that they will always be in cached state, however, and for 
> SMP, we still want to drop the implicit lock in cases where the 
> processor might not know they are cached exclusive, but we know there 
> are no other racing users.  And there are plenty of old processors out 
> there to still make it worthwhile.
> 

Is there one processor that benefit from this patch then ?

I couldnt get a win on my test machines, maybe they are not old enough ;)

umask() doesnt need xchg() atomic semantic. If several threads are using 
umask() concurrently results are not guaranted anyway.

[-- Attachment #2: umask.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 441 bytes --]

--- linux-2.6.21-rc6/kernel/sys.c
+++ linux-2.6.21-rc6-ed/kernel/sys.c
@@ -2138,8 +2138,10 @@ asmlinkage long sys_getrusage(int who, s
 
 asmlinkage long sys_umask(int mask)
 {
-	mask = xchg(&current->fs->umask, mask & S_IRWXUGO);
-	return mask;
+	struct fs_struct *fs = current->fs;
+	int old = fs->umask;
+	fs->umask = mask & S_IRWXUGO;
+	return old;
 }
     
 asmlinkage long sys_prctl(int option, unsigned long arg2, unsigned long arg3,