Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2001 16:38:14 -0800 (PST)
From: John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
Cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org, Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com>, Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
Subject: Re: cur{thread/proc}, or not.
Message-ID: <XFMail.011112163814.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1011112185746.36592C-100000@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 13-Nov-01 Robert Watson wrote: > > 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. No, that was on sparc32, not sparc64. All of our current architectures would be fine with it. -- John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc "Power Users Use the Power to Serve!" - http://www.FreeBSD.org/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.011112163814.jhb>