[PATCH 1/2] Optimize generic spinlock code and use C11 like atomic macros.

[Stefan Liebler]

On 04/18/2017 03:09 PM, Stefan Liebler wrote:
> On 04/10/2017 01:59 PM, Stefan Liebler wrote:
>> On 04/09/2017 03:51 PM, Torvald Riegel wrote:
>>> On Fri, 2017-04-07 at 18:22 +0200, Stefan Liebler wrote:
>>>> @architecture maintainers:
>>>> I've added defines of ATOMIC_EXCHANGE_USES_CAS in the architecture
>>>> specific atomic-machine.h files.
>>>> See comment in include/atomic.h:
>>>> /* ATOMIC_EXCHANGE_USES_CAS is equal to 1 if atomic_exchange operations
>>>>     are implemented based on a CAS loop; otherwise, this is 0 and we
>>>> assume
>>>>     that the atomic_exchange operations could provide better
>>>> performance
>>>>     than a CAS loop.  */
>>>>
>>>> Can review the definition to 0 or 1 in the atomic-machine.h file of
>>>> your
>>>> architecture, please?
>
>
> PING
>
PING
>
>>>
>>> I think we primarily need feedback from the maintainers of the
>>> architectures where we're not quite sure.  Let's see how responsive
>>> everyone is and then decide whether we need to continue pinging some of
>>> them potentially or whether we have enough information to be able to
>>> commit the patch.
>>>
>> Okay.
>>
>> Chris has already replied directly to me.
>> On 04/07/2017 06:50 PM, Chris Metcalf wrote:
>>> Thanks, looks good for tilegx/tilepro.
>>
Andreas has answered regarding the explicit check of 
ATOMIC_EXCHANGE_USES_CAS in include/atomic.h.
@Andreas: is m68k okay?

Joseph has replied for mips.

What about the other architectures? Is the definition of 
ATOMIC_EXCHANGE_USES_CAS correct?

>> Bye
>> Stefan
>>
>