On Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 17:57:36 +1100, O Plameras wrote: >Benno wrote: > >>On Wed Dec 21, 2005 at 17:35:43 +1100, O Plameras wrote: >> >> >>>It seems to me, that this argument is becoming about "you said these and >>>I said >>>these" but NOTHING about what really matters and that is how Ubuntu >>>implement SMP. >>> >>>To me,then, this is not about me or you, what I said and what you said; >>>this is about what Ubunto >>>does as far as SMP is concerned. >>> >>>You are saying that the previous posts are about what Ubunto does when >>>implementing UP. >>> >>>So, what about what Ubunto does when it implements SMP ? >>> >>> >>> >> >>From Jeff's post: >> >> >>>1) Ubuntu currently ships and supports separate packages for UP and SMP >>> kernels >>> >>> >> >>Is there something more to the question than that? They have the normal >>kernel >>source and compile it twice, once UP, once SMP. It then ships a package >>for each >>of these. >> >>Or is the question about how the Linux *kernel* implement SMP? >> >> > > >It was shown what spinlock is for UP. > >What is spinlock for SMP ? >
<sigh> So you are asking how the Linux *kernel* implements SMP. This has nothing to do with Ubuntu. I'm sure you can look this up in the kernel code yourself. The place to start looking is in include/linux/spinlock.h, and include/asm-i386/spinlock.h It isn't really worth spamming the whole list with the obtuse x86 assembler. Cheers, Benno -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User's Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ Subscription info and FAQs: http://slug.org.au/faq/mailinglists.html
