Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 18:12:54 -0800 (PST) From: Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com> To: "Alan L. Cox" <alc@imimic.com> Cc: Jake Burkholder <jake@locore.ca>, Matt Jacob <mjacob@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/vm uma_dbg.c Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0211101810230.62965-100000@beppo> In-Reply-To: <3DCEAA0E.337BF15B@imimic.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Sorry for the delay- I took the kid to see gramma... Sure- let me look at this a little closer - I'll interrupt the make release and try a different approach. Sorry for not reading the atomic stuff closer. I mean, after all, I believe that sparc *does* have atomic byte instructions. My bad for not reading the man page closeer. -matt On Sun, 10 Nov 2002, Alan L. Cox wrote: > Jake Burkholder wrote: > > > > Apparently, On Sun, Nov 10, 2002 at 08:16:44AM -0800, > > Matt Jacob said words to the effect of; > > > > > mjacob 2002/11/10 08:16:44 PST > > > > > > Modified files: > > > sys/vm uma_dbg.c > > > Log: > > > Use atomic_set_8 on the us_freelist maps as they are not otherwise > > > protected. Furthermore, in some RISC architectures with no normal > > > byte operations, the surrounding 3 bytes are also affected by the > > > read-modify-write that has to occur. > > > > > > Revision Changes Path > > > 1.9 +2 -2 src/sys/vm/uma_dbg.c > > > > sparc64 can't do atomic operations on less than 32 bits, this needs > > a lock. > > > > Matt, can you try acquiring and releasing the zone mutex in > uma_dbg_alloc() and uma_dbg_free() instead? > > Alan > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0211101810230.62965-100000>