Re: spinlock support on loongarch64
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: spinlock support on loongarch64 |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1866518.1667425024@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: spinlock support on loongarch64 (Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de>) |
Ответы |
Re: spinlock support on loongarch64
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes: > On 2022-11-02 14:55:04 -0400, Tom Lane wrote: >> After actually testing (by removing the ARM stanza on a macOS machine), >> it seems that placement doesn't work, because of the default definition >> of S_UNLOCK at the bottom of the "#if defined(__GNUC__)" stuff. Putting >> it inside that test works, and seems like it should be fine, since this >> is a GCC-ism. > Looks reasonable. I tested it on x86-64 by disabling that section and it > works. Thanks for looking. > I wonder if it's worth keeing the full copy of this in the arm section? We > could just define SPIN_DELAY() for aarch64? I thought about that, but given the increasing popularity of ARM I bet that that stanza is going to accrete more special-case knowledge over time. It's probably simplest to keep it separate. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: