Re: [PATCH] Runtime memory barrier patching

From: Arjan van de Ven (arjanv@redhat.com)
Date: Tue Apr 22 2003 - 03:43:58 EST

Next message: Nikita Danilov: "Re: [PATCH] (one line): use #ifdef with CONFIG_*"
Previous message: Duncan Sands: "Re: inconsistent usage of"
Next in thread: Andi Kleen: "Re: [PATCH] Runtime memory barrier patching"
Reply: Andi Kleen: "Re: [PATCH] Runtime memory barrier patching"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Tue, 2003-04-22 at 01:23, Linux Kernel Mailing List wrote:
> ChangeSet 1.1169, 2003/04/21 16:23:20-07:00, ak@muc.de
>
> [PATCH] Runtime memory barrier patching
>
> This implements automatic code patching of memory barriers based
> on the CPU capabilities. Normally lock ; addl $0,(%esp) barriers
> are used, but these are a bit slow on the Pentium 4.
>

very nice. Question: would it be doable use this for prefetch() as well?
Eg default to a non-prefetch kernel and patch in the proper prefetch
instruction for the current cpu ? (eg AMD prefetch vs Intel one etc etc)

application/pgp-signature attachment: This is a digitally signed message part

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

Next message: Nikita Danilov: "Re: [PATCH] (one line): use #ifdef with CONFIG_*"
Previous message: Duncan Sands: "Re: inconsistent usage of"
Next in thread: Andi Kleen: "Re: [PATCH] Runtime memory barrier patching"
Reply: Andi Kleen: "Re: [PATCH] Runtime memory barrier patching"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 23 2003 - 22:00:32 EST