From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161068AbWAHTKP (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jan 2006 14:10:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1161077AbWAHTKO (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jan 2006 14:10:14 -0500 Received: from pentafluge.infradead.org ([213.146.154.40]:37011 "EHLO pentafluge.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161068AbWAHTKN (ORCPT ); Sun, 8 Jan 2006 14:10:13 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] amd76x_pm: C2 powersaving for AMD K7 From: Arjan van de Ven To: Joerg Sommrey Cc: Linux kernel mailing list In-Reply-To: <20060108190337.GA22780@sommrey.de> References: <20060108190337.GA22780@sommrey.de> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 20:10:10 +0100 Message-Id: <1136747410.2955.29.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 (2.2.3-2.fc4) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: -2.8 (--) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 3.0.4 on pentafluge.infradead.org summary: Content analysis details: (-2.8 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -2.8 ALL_TRUSTED Did not pass through any untrusted hosts X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by pentafluge.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 20:03 +0100, Joerg Sommrey wrote: > + * Locking is done using atomic_t variables, no spin locks needed. but... there seems to be a race now: + smp_mb(); + if (unlikely(atomic_read(&amd76x_stat.num_idle) + == num_online)) { + /* Invoke C2 */ + prs->C2_cnt++; + inb(amd76x_pm_cfg.C2_reg); + break; + } also.. atomic_t + manual interrupt disabling isn't by definition better than a spinlock... when people say "spinlocks are expensive" they imply that atomics are also expensive...