WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Xen

xen-devel

[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [rfc] [patch] grant_entry.flags accessors

To: Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [rfc] [patch] grant_entry.flags accessors
From: Hollis Blanchard <hollisb@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 2006年6月28日 12:07:40 -0500
Cc: Jimi Xenidis <jimix@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel <xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xen-ppc-devel <xen-ppc-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: 2006年6月28日 10:07:37 -0700
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <0f343a9b98fa1fd7f496167b73007980@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Organization: IBM Linux Technology Center
References: <1151097564.14454.44.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <46ab924009436680faa7cc0cb807c411@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <1151420814.31429.35.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <6bd19f34d11ffa609d6650b7937fb8b0@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <1151424690.31429.106.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20a2a4524ce898b8fbd49cfd27c38b12@xxxxxxxxxxxx> <C140B0AB-770D-45D3-8261-7864CB7A729E@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <0f343a9b98fa1fd7f496167b73007980@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Wed, 2006年06月28日 at 07:43 +0100, Keir Fraser wrote:
> On 27 Jun 2006, at 18:45, Jimi Xenidis wrote:
>
> > Hmm, the interesting part is that as far as bit-ops go in Linux x86 
> > converged to longs rather then ppc converging to some the arbitrary 
> > bit method:
> > see:
> > include/asm-i386/bitops.h clear_bit 71 static inline void 
> > clear_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long * addr)
> >
> > I've been told this was to solve a performance issue, but I am no 
> > expert.
>
> Well there would be a performance impact for other architectures, no 
> doubt. x86/64 never moved to longs for bitops.
They wouldn't have to. Because other architectures did, especially i386,
that ensures that all common code will use bitops only on longs, which
is what we'd like to see in Xen as well.
-- 
Hollis Blanchard
IBM Linux Technology Center
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Previous by Date: [Xen-devel] ASM Help Requested , John Anderson
Next by Date: [Xen-devel] Create VM with libxc , ferrucci
Previous by Thread: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [rfc] [patch] grant_entry.flags accessors , Keir Fraser
Next by Thread: [Xen-devel] [patch] grant_entry.flags accessors , Hollis Blanchard
Indexes: [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]

Copyright ©, Citrix Systems Inc. All rights reserved. Legal and Privacy
Citrix This site is hosted by Citrix

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /