Patch to optimize "bare" critical sections
jhb at FreeBSD.org
Wed Nov 24 07:41:27 PST 2004
On Tuesday 23 November 2004 10:26 pm, Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
> On Nov 23, 2004, at 1:31 PM, John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Tuesday 23 November 2004 03:00 pm, John Baldwin wrote:
> >> Basically, I have a patch to divorce the interrupt disable/deferring
> >> to
> >> only happen inside of spinlocks using a new spinlock_enter/exit() API
> >> (where a spinlock_enter/exit includes a critical section as well) but
> >> that
> >> plain critical sections won't have to do such a thing. I've tested
> >> it on
> >> i386, alpha, and sparc64 already, and it has also been tested on arm.
> >> I'm
> >> unable to get a cross-built powerpc kernel to link (linker dies with a
> >> signal 6), but the compile did finish. I have cross-compiled ia64 and
> >> amd64
> >> successfully, but have not run tested due to ENOHARDWARE. So, I would
> >> appreciate it if a few folks could try the patch out on ppc, ia64, and
> >> amd64 to make sure it works ok. Thanks.
> >> http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/spinlock.patch
> > *cough* Ahem, http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/patches/spinlock.patch
> > Sorry about that.
> The patch doesn't apply cleanly. Can you create a patch against HEAD
> and not your lock branch?
Doh, the patch has been updated to be against HEAD now.
John Baldwin <jhb at FreeBSD.org> <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
"Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org
More information about the freebsd-amd64