[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4CDD6AD8.5030003@goop.org>
Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2010 08:27:04 -0800
From: Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy@...p.org>
To: vatsa@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Nick Piggin <npiggin@...e.de>,
Jan Beulich <JBeulich@...ell.com>, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
Xen-devel <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
Linux Virtualization <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
Jeremy Fitzhardinge <jeremy.fitzhardinge@...rix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/20] x86/ticketlock: make large and small ticket versions
of spin_lock the same
On 11/12/2010 04:19 AM, Srivatsa Vaddagiri wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 10:59:45AM -0400, Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
>> Make the bulk of __ticket_spin_lock look identical for large and small
>> number of cpus.
> [snip]
>
>> #if (NR_CPUS < 256)
>> static __always_inline void __ticket_spin_lock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
>> {
>> - register union {
>> - struct __raw_tickets tickets;
>> - unsigned short slock;
>> - } inc = { .slock = 1 << TICKET_SHIFT };
>> + register struct __raw_tickets inc = { .tail = 1 };
> [snip]
>
>> #else
>> static __always_inline void __ticket_spin_lock(arch_spinlock_t *lock)
>> {
>> - unsigned inc = 1 << TICKET_SHIFT;
>> - __ticket_t tmp;
>> + register struct __raw_tickets inc = { .tickets.tail = 1 };
> s/.tickets//?
>
> Otherwise I get a compile error for NR_CPUS > 256, with just 4 patches applied.
Yeah, likely. That's precisely why I wanted to make them the same ;).
J
--
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