Tom, thank you for your advise. On 2012/01/01, at 3:39, Tom Lane wrote:
> What I suggest we should do about this is provide an overridable option > in pg_config_manual.h, along the lines of > > #if defined(__ppc64__) || defined(__powerpc64__) > #define USE_PPC_LWARX_MUTEX_HINT > #endif > > and then test that symbol in s_lock.h. This will provide an escape > hatch for anyone who doesn't want the decision tied to 64-bit-ness, > while still enabling the option automatically for the majority of > people who could use it. Fair enough. I recreated the patch as you advised.
ppc-TAS_SPIN-20120101.diff
Description: Binary data
> BTW, while reading the ISA document I couldn't help noticing that LWARX > is clearly specified to operate on 4-byte quantities (there's LDARX if > you want to use 8-byte). Which seems to mean that this bit in s_lock.h > just represents bogus waste of space: > > #if defined(__ppc64__) || defined(__powerpc64__) > typedef unsigned long slock_t; > #else > typedef unsigned int slock_t; > #endif > > Shouldn't we just make slock_t be "int" for both PPC and PPC64? I'd like it to be untouched for this TAS_SPIN for powerpc discussion, since it seems it remainds like this for several years and maybe it needs some more careful consideration especially for sign extension… Regards, Manabu Ori
-- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
