[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <18997.52863.576426.501025@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 14:30:55 +1000
From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
To: Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
benh@...nel.crashing.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
linuxppc-dev@...abs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] lib: Provide generic atomic64_t implementation
Roland Dreier writes:
> FWIW, Nehalem EX actually goes to 8 cores/16 threads per socket. But
> worrying about 32-bit performance on Nehalem is a little silly -- this
> simplest solution is simply to run a 64-bit kernel.
I'm not worried about ANY x86 processor, 32-bit or 64-bit, in fact,
since x86 already has an atomic64_t implementation for both 32-bit and
64-bit.
It is interesting, though, that arch/x86/include/asm/atomic_32.h
unconditionally uses cmpxchg8b to implement atomic64_t, but I thought
that cmpxchg8b didn't exist in processors prior to the Pentium.
Presumably you can't use perf_counters on a 386 or 486.
Paul.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists