This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the glibc project.
Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Mark Kettenis <kettenis@wins.uva.nl> writes: > At the end of this message you'll find how these operations can be > implemented for the i386. The idea is that the `if'-statements will > all be optimized away. The only `problem' is the fact that the lock > will always be present, even if it is not used. I would be interested > in a way to eleminate the lock when possible. However, I don't think > wasting a few bytes is going tobe a big problem. It's an interesting concept. But I don't think we have to be that general. Why should be allow atomic objects of other than the natual sizes? The only possible motivation is size but then, with the spinlock, this is more than nullified (on platforms which don't need them). I think defining types atomic_t and uatomic_t (latter is unsigned) which are guaranteed to have at least 32 bits should be enough. Do you know about situations where this is not the case? The only problem I could see is that you want to have longer types also on 32bit platforms. Then I'd suggest atomic_least32_t uatomic_least32_t atomic_least64_t uatomic_least64_t Of course we need then something like your macros since modifying the 64 bit object does not work without it on a 32 bit platform. Maybe we can even define atomic_least8_t etc and on platforms like x86 we can define these with the minimal amount of bits. So maybe: #define atomic_object(class, name, size, oper) \ atomic_object_##oper (class, name, size) #define atomic_object_INC(class, name, size) \ class int##size##_t name #define atomic_object_DEC(class, name, size) \ class int##size##_t name #define atomic_object_INC_DEC(class, name, size) \ class int##size##_t name #define atomic_object_XADD(class, name, size) \ class int##size##_t name; \ __libc_lock_define_initialized (class, __atomic_lock_##name) #define atomic_object_INC_XADD(class, name, size) \ class int##size##_t name; \ __libc_lock_define_initialized (class, __atomic_lock_##name) The `oper' parameter to atomic_object would then have to be one of XADD CMPX XADD_CMPX INC INC_XADD INC_CMPX INC_XADD_CMPX DEC DEC_XADD DEC_CMPX DEC_XADD_CMPX INC_DEC INC_DEC_XADD INC_DEC_CMPX INC_DEC_XADD_CMPX Which shouldn't be too bad. > __asm__ __volatile__ ("lock; incl %0" : : "m" (NAME) : "memory") This does not work. `lock' only works on bt, bts, btr, btc, xchg, add, adc, and -- ---------------. drepper at gnu.org ,-. 1325 Chesapeake Terrace Ulrich Drepper \ ,-------------------' \ Sunnyvale, CA 94089 USA Cygnus Solutions `--' drepper at cygnus.com `------------------------
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |