Tom Lane wrote:
> Alan Stange <stange@rentec.com> writes:
> > Hmmm. I've just been looking at the last snapshot of the HEAD and
> > s_lock.h is still using an ldstub instruction instead of a cas for the
> > inlined tas() function when gcc is being used. Having a cas
> > instruction here would probably be an improvement too, right?
>
> [ shrug... ] The person who submitted the solaris_sparc.s change failed
> to provide any evidence that it was anything but cosmetic, so I didn't
> worry about changing the equivalent gcc code. If there's actually a
> performance win, please cite chapter and verse. Also, shouldn't we be
> worrying about breaking older Sparc chips? Does CAS go all the way
> back?
I don't think it is a good idea to be using different ASM instructions
based for different compilers --- they should be the same.
--
Bruce Momjian http://candle.pha.pa.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
