[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130323173238.GA13379@pd.tnic>
Date: Sat, 23 Mar 2013 18:32:38 +0100
From: Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
the arch/x86 maintainers <x86@...nel.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 12/29] x86, tsx: Add a per thread transaction disable
count
On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 10:16:28AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 23, 2013 at 8:52 AM, Borislav Petkov <bp@...en8.de> wrote:
> >
> > Really? Let's see:
>
> Your test seems to assume that a single bit is sufficient, which
> sounds unlikely. If you have any kind of nesting going on, you need
> more than one bit. Then add/sub isn't a single "xor" of a bit any
> more.
Right, but does nesting even apply here? I mean, AFAICR the commit
message, we're talking about per-thread transaction disabling. IOW, this
is an on/off button used in a boolean context.
Or is this going to be used as a mechanism to tisable TSX when max
nesting level has been reached?
Hmmm.
Btw, the disable/reenable_txn() aren't used anywhere in the patchset and
I'd actually like to get an idea where/how those are used.
Thanks.
--
Regards/Gruss,
Boris.
Sent from a fat crate under my desk. Formatting is fine.
--
--
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