Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 28 Jun 1999 21:55:30 +0200 (SAT)
From:      John Hay <jhay@mikom.csir.co.za>
To:        dillon@apollo.backplane.com (Matthew Dillon)
Cc:        freebsd-smp@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: high-efficiency SMP locks - submission for review
Message-ID:  <199906281955.VAA17112@zibbi.mikom.csir.co.za>
In-Reply-To: <199906281947.MAA24287@apollo.backplane.com> from Matthew Dillon at "Jun 28, 1999 12:47:25 pm"

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> :> The 386, I doubt has it.  There have been a couple of suggestions for ending
> :> the support for the 386 as it will simplify some ugly code for emulating
> :> kernel-mode write faults etc, but it's never happened.  Apparently the
> :> 386 is common in some areas still.
> :
> :The 386 is still used a lot in embeded systems. (With FreeBSD running on
> :some of them. :-)
> :
> 
>     Since 386's are UP systems, I think it would be fairly easy to implement
>     the UP version of the compare-and-exchange primitive trivially with an
>     spl wrapper.  We should be able to freely use use the cmpxchg instruction
>     on SMP systems.
> 

Yes, I understand that and my worry wasn't about the lock code, but it
sounded like somebody was sharpening an ax for the 386 code and I just
wanted to show that it was still used. :-)

John
-- 
John Hay -- John.Hay@mikom.csir.co.za


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-smp" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199906281955.VAA17112>