On Sat, 2015-03-07 at 19:19 +0800, Kevin Hao wrote: > It makes no sense to use a variant lock token on a platform which > doesn't support for shared-processor logical partitions. Actually we > can eliminate a memory load by using a fixed lock token on these > platforms.
Does this provide an actual measurable benefit ? I found that the lock token was quite handy for debugging ... Cheers, Ben. > Signed-off-by: Kevin Hao <haoke...@gmail.com> > --- > arch/powerpc/include/asm/spinlock.h | 8 ++++++-- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/spinlock.h > b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/spinlock.h > index 4dbe072eecbe..d303cdad2519 100644 > --- a/arch/powerpc/include/asm/spinlock.h > +++ b/arch/powerpc/include/asm/spinlock.h > @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ > > #define smp_mb__after_unlock_lock() smp_mb() /* Full ordering for lock. */ > > -#ifdef CONFIG_PPC64 > +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_SPLPAR > /* use 0x800000yy when locked, where yy == CPU number */ > #ifdef __BIG_ENDIAN__ > #define LOCK_TOKEN (*(u32 *)(&get_paca()->lock_token)) > @@ -187,9 +187,13 @@ extern void arch_spin_unlock_wait(arch_spinlock_t *lock); > > #ifdef CONFIG_PPC64 > #define __DO_SIGN_EXTEND "extsw %0,%0\n" > -#define WRLOCK_TOKEN LOCK_TOKEN /* it's negative */ > #else > #define __DO_SIGN_EXTEND > +#endif > + > +#ifdef CONFIG_PPC_SPLPAR > +#define WRLOCK_TOKEN LOCK_TOKEN /* it's negative */ > +#else > #define WRLOCK_TOKEN (-1) > #endif > _______________________________________________ Linuxppc-dev mailing list Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev