Re: Spinlock implementation on x86_64 (was Re: Better LWLocks with compare-and-swap (9.4)) - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Heikki Linnakangas
Subject Re: Spinlock implementation on x86_64 (was Re: Better LWLocks with compare-and-swap (9.4))
Date
Msg-id 521F2E45.8060406@vmware.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Spinlock implementation on x86_64 (was Re: Better LWLocks with compare-and-swap (9.4))  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
On 28.08.2013 20:21, Tom Lane wrote:
> 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.

Committed with some comment changes. I also added a note to the 32-bit 
x86 implementation, suggesting we probably should do the same there, 
no-one's just gotten around to do the testing.

- Heikki



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Oleg Bartunov
Date:
Subject: Re: [v9.4] row level security
Next
From: Alexander Korotkov
Date:
Subject: Re: [v9.4] row level security