On Friday 06 August 2004 03:30, Bruce M Simpson wrote: > On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 04:15:32PM -0600, Scott Long wrote: > > >>Is there any particular reason why atomic_load_acq_*() and > > >>atomic_store_rel_*() are implemented with CMPXCHG and XCHG > > >> instead of MOV on i386/amd64 UP? > > Have a look at Linux. They ended up doing a runtime self-modifying > kernel hack so they could ship generic kernels which used the > appropriate locking instructions on each x86 family CPU. I also really like the way the kernel exports a page containing 'the best syscall sequence' for the current processor.Received on Fri Aug 06 2004 - 06:31:30 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:05 UTC