Re: [patch] SMP alternatives

From: Alan Cox
Date: Wed Nov 23 2005 - 17:18:12 EST


On Mer, 2005-11-23 at 13:36 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > have to add PAT support which we need to do anyway we would get a world
> > where on uniprocessor lock prefix only works on addresse targets we want
> > it to - ie pci_alloc_consistent() pages.
>
> No. That would be wrong.
>
> The thing is, "lock" is useless EVEN ON SMP in user space 99% of the time.

Now I see what you are aiming at, yes that makes vast amounts of sense
and since AMD have the "no lock effect" bit for general case maybe they
can


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/