On 06/16/2010 02:12 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 01:55:13AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 06/16/2010 01:14 AM, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
Create urcu/arch_unknown.h and urcu/uatomic_arch_unknown.h, which
contain only #error statements and explanatory comments. This forces
build failures on unrecognized architectures in preference to trying
to guess at what operations might be safe on such architectures.
One other semi-feasible alternative is to use hashed arrays of locks
that are acquired with signals disabled. However, this seems a bit
too ornate, especially for architectures for which the gcc __sync_
primitives work correctly.
ia64 is one.
Does ia64 work with the current code? (My guess is "no" -- I believe
that you would get build errors. But I have been surprised before!)
I don't know. :)
If my guess is correct, my thought would be to create urcu/arch_gcc.h
and urcu/uatomic_arch_gcc.h files with the appropriate definitions
based on __sync_ primitives. If you can test on IA64, I would also
be happy to add support for it based on these new files.
Sure, thanks!
Paolo
_______________________________________________
ltt-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.casi.polymtl.ca/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ltt-dev
