From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 2080 invoked by alias); 25 Nov 2008 16:48:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 2055 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Nov 2008 16:47:59 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.31) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 16:47:03 +0000 Received: from int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (int-mx1.corp.redhat.com [172.16.52.254]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id mAPGgo5L026587; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 11:42:50 -0500 Received: from zebedee.pink (vpn-12-72.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.12.72]) by int-mx1.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id mAPGgm10018746; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 11:42:48 -0500 Message-ID: <492C2B08.1050804@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 17:40:00 -0000 From: Andrew Haley User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (X11/20081105) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Julian Brown CC: gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org, paul@codesourcery.com Subject: PING #2 [Was PING Re: [PATCH, ARM] Atomic builtins using kernel helpers for Linux/EABI] References: <20080701174632.0b53565a@boris.athome> <49083153.1010401@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <49083153.1010401@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact gcc-patches-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-patches-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2008-11/txt/msg01315.txt.bz2 > Julian Brown wrote: >> Hi, >> >> This patch implements the atomic builtins described at: >> >> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.3.0/gcc/Atomic-Builtins.html >> >> for ARM EABI Linux. This implementation uses the kernel helpers >> __kernel_cmpxchg and __kernel_dmb, and so should work on any >> architecture which supports those. (More-efficient versions are possible >> using ldrex/strex on architectures >=v6, but those are not written yet.) >> >> Atomic operations are provided for data sizes of 1, 2 and 4 bytes (but >> not 8 bytes). The implementation uses actual functions >> (__sync_fetch_and_add_2, etc.) rather than expanding code inline. >> >> Tested with cross to arm-none-linux-gnueabi, and with some additional >> hand-written tests which hopefully exercised the atomicity of the >> operations sufficiently. >> >> OK for mainline? > > http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2008-07/msg00025.html > > What happened to this? Anyone? Still not there... Andrew.