| From: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | stange(at)rentec(dot)com, pgsql-ports(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: solaris build problem with Sun compilers |
| Date: | 2006-05-12 18:14:47 |
| Message-ID: | 200605121814.k4CIEl614655@candle.pha.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-ports |
Tom Lane wrote:
> Alan Stange <stange(at)rentec(dot)com> writes:
> > Hmmm. I've just been looking at the last snapshot of the HEAD and
> > s_lock.h is still using an ldstub instruction instead of a cas for the
> > inlined tas() function when gcc is being used. Having a cas
> > instruction here would probably be an improvement too, right?
>
> [ shrug... ] The person who submitted the solaris_sparc.s change failed
> to provide any evidence that it was anything but cosmetic, so I didn't
> worry about changing the equivalent gcc code. If there's actually a
> performance win, please cite chapter and verse. Also, shouldn't we be
> worrying about breaking older Sparc chips? Does CAS go all the way
> back?
I don't think it is a good idea to be using different ASM instructions
based for different compilers --- they should be the same.
--
Bruce Momjian http://candle.pha.pa.us
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
+ If your life is a hard drive, Christ can be your backup. +
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2006-05-12 18:22:18 | Re: solaris build problem with Sun compilers |
| Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2006-05-12 18:10:31 | Re: solaris build problem with Sun compilers |