Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnakangas@vmware.com> writes:
> So, my plan is to apply the attached non-locked-tas-spin-x86_64.patch to
> master. But I would love to get feedback from people running different
> x86_64 hardware.
Surely this patch should update the existing comment at line 209? Or at
least point out that a non-locked test in TAS_SPIN is not the same as a
non-locked test in tas() itself.
Other than the commenting, I have no objection to this. I think you're
probably right that the old tests in which this looked like a bad idea
were adding the unlocked test to tas() not only the spin case.
regards, tom lane
