From owner-freebsd-arch Wed Feb 27 12: 5:32 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from angelica.unixdaemons.com (angelica.unixdaemons.com [209.148.64.135]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A8EF937B405 for ; Wed, 27 Feb 2002 12:05:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from angelica.unixdaemons.com (bmilekic@localhost.unixdaemons.com [127.0.0.1]) by angelica.unixdaemons.com (8.12.2/8.12.1) with ESMTP id g1RK5Jh4042996; Wed, 27 Feb 2002 15:05:19 -0500 (EST) Received: (from bmilekic@localhost) by angelica.unixdaemons.com (8.12.2/8.12.1/Submit) id g1RK5JUJ042995; Wed, 27 Feb 2002 15:05:19 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from bmilekic) Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 15:05:19 -0500 From: Bosko Milekic To: Julian Elischer Cc: Terry Lambert , Jeff Roberson , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Slab allocator Message-ID: <20020227150519.A42681@unixdaemons.com> References: <20020227143330.A34054@unixdaemons.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: ; from julian@elischer.org on Wed, Feb 27, 2002 at 11:41:50AM -0800 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 Wed, Feb 27, 2002 at 11:41:50AM -0800, Julian Elischer wrote: > The idea of Per CPU caches is that only that CPU is accessing it so > therefore you shouldn't need a lock at all. unless you are protecting > against interrupts on your own processor > and pre-emption. There are also ways to implement atomic > operations on queues that require no locks at all. > (e.g. using the test and swap instruction) Yes, that's exactly the point. You have to protect against pre-emption and interrupts. -- Bosko Milekic bmilekic@unixdaemons.com bmilekic@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message