From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 22:31:38 -0600 From: Cort Dougan Subject: Re: [RFC] atomic pte updates for x86 smp Message-ID: <20001011223138.B962@hq.fsmlabs.com> References: <200010120406.VAA07624@pizda.ninka.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: <200010120406.VAA07624@pizda.ninka.net>; from David S. Miller on Wed, Oct 11, 2000 at 09:06:45PM -0700 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: "David S. Miller" Cc: blah@kvack.org, torvalds@transmeta.com, tytso@mit.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: } Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 00:03:31 -0400 (EDT) } From: "Benjamin C.R. LaHaise" } } It's safe because of how x86s hardware works } } What about other platforms? On the PPC's that don't do a hardware walk we do a normal write to the hash table (with a spinlock). On the hardware walk PPC's I'm told this is done with with a lwarx/stwcx pair (conditional load/store on exclusive access). Any comments on how this would affect PPC? -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux.eu.org/Linux-MM/