Re: [PATCH] lockref: use cmpxchg64 explicitly for lockless updates

[Waiman Long]

On 09/19/2013 02:11 PM, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 1:06 PM, Will Deacon<will.deacon@xxxxxxx>  wrote:
> > The cmpxchg() function tends not to support 64-bit arguments on 32-bit
> > architectures. This could be either due to use of unsigned long arguments
> > (like on ARM) or lack of instruction support (cmpxchgq on x86). However,
> > these architectures may implement a specific cmpxchg64() function to
> > provide 64-bit cmpxchg support instead
> I'm certainly ok with this, but I wonder how much point there is to
> use the cmpxchg alternatives for 32-bit architectures at all...
>
>  From a performance standpoint, lockref really is expected to mainly
> help with big machines. Only insane people would do big machines with
> 32-bit kernels these days.
> Of course, it may be that cmpxchg is actually faster on some
> architectures, but at least on x86-32, cmpxchg8b is traditionally
> quite slow.
>
> In other words, I'd actually like to see some numbers if there are
> loads where this actually helps and matters...
>
>                     Linus

I agreed that 32-bit machines are not likely to be big enough to get 
benefit from this feature. However, I do see a minor problem with the 
current code. If a user tries to turn on CMPXCHG_LOCKREF on a 32-bit 
build, he/she will get a compilation error because a 64-bit data type is 
not supported in 32-bit mode's cmpxchg(). Because of this, my original 
patch also uses cmpxchg64() which is equivalent to cmpxchg() in 64-bit 
machine for 64-bit data type.

I would suggest either change to use cmpxchg64() or add the dependence 
line "depends on 64BIT" to CMPXCHG_LOCKREF.

-Longman
--
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/