From owner-freebsd-arch Mon Nov 12 16:35:31 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [204.156.12.50]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3128637B405; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 16:35:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from fledge.watson.org (ak82hjs7hex92j@fledge.pr.watson.org [192.0.2.3]) by fledge.watson.org (8.11.6/8.11.5) with SMTP id fAD0ZGB37659; Mon, 12 Nov 2001 19:35:16 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from robert@fledge.watson.org) Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 19:35:15 -0500 (EST) From: Robert Watson X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: Terry Lambert Cc: John Baldwin , Matthew Dillon , freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cur{thread/proc}, or not. In-Reply-To: <3BF05D4C.55A9A459@mindspring.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Mon, 12 Nov 2001, Terry Lambert wrote: > John Baldwin wrote: > > the refcount for now, but I still have patches that > > some people don't like for implementing a simple refcount API just using > > atomic operations. > > Please commit these. Using mutexes in this instance is just a happy way > to put the performance in the toilet. My recollection is that there was some concern about the size of the unit of atomic operation across platforms. I may not recall correctly, but my understanding was that some platforms substantially limited the potential size of the target of the atomic operation to less than the normal arithmetic unit size. Again, subject to the fallibility of my recollection, the maximum unit for atomic operations on Sparc64 was 24-bit, despite the native register size being 64-bit. Robert N M Watson FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Project robert@fledge.watson.org NAI Labs, Safeport Network Services To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message