Re: [PATCH] microoptimize locking primitives by avoiding unnecessary atomic ops

2016-06-01 Thread Mateusz Guzik
On Fri, May 27, 2016 at 04:21:11PM -0700, John Baldwin wrote: > On Friday, May 27, 2016 09:17:01 PM Mateusz Guzik wrote: > > Hello there, > > > > quite some time ago I posted a trivial patch to locking primitives. What > > they do is the inline part tries an atomic op and if that fails the > > act

Re: [PATCH] microoptimize locking primitives by avoiding unnecessary atomic ops

2016-05-27 Thread John Baldwin
On Friday, May 27, 2016 09:17:01 PM Mateusz Guzik wrote: > Hello there, > > quite some time ago I posted a trivial patch to locking primitives. What > they do is the inline part tries an atomic op and if that fails the > actual function is called, which immediately tries the same op. > > The obvi

Re: [PATCH] microoptimize locking primitives by avoiding unnecessary atomic ops

2016-05-27 Thread Eric van Gyzen
On 05/27/16 02:17 PM, Mateusz Guzik wrote: > Hello there, > > quite some time ago I posted a trivial patch to locking primitives. What > they do is the inline part tries an atomic op and if that fails the > actual function is called, which immediately tries the same op. > > The obvious optimisation