From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from sourceware.org (server1.sourceware.org [209.132.180.131]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42F061F85E for ; Thu, 12 Jul 2018 20:39:04 +0000 (UTC) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=default; b=dQjPoAZ9sntQehqZ sbFVFmdc34PXhsrUFVg6EEgeBPWUnTX/bmzZX4aVfXgnuFo8LxerYdSAdPuYAKLp I/zYzOtaumQ940iP8aMOYAa7OEsKl3R+CUPzRPni5TzNYFmGugPkDs18G+CGHN+s XuuaLPgFOxUVGQi3QX+SBKBUzwc= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id :list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post :list-help:sender:subject:to:references:from:message-id:date :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=default; bh=LsDh927ixZt8dvap7lCng9 pP6jY=; b=SA/KUkrUVrvHpA+xONC0EJoSu9vxJthmmbHJ46bHiNuu3SmLeD9zxO MkQSc5FEiuRyvKmU1ieDFR45jEd/1HDTaxRbIJqLD+qeKx9vr9HeIfgSLyeiFv5V tiu/1WG/pIDLYJbSewvT3YzUFyEMFeiSxrZrjafqUkcNPFUcP9/Eg= Received: (qmail 123700 invoked by alias); 12 Jul 2018 20:39:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 123287 invoked by uid 89); 12 Jul 2018 20:39:01 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 2/8] nptl: Add C11 threads mtx_* functions To: Adhemerval Zanella , libc-alpha@sourceware.org References: <1517591084-11347-1-git-send-email-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> <1517591084-11347-3-git-send-email-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> <44460c52-bff8-d7a7-4d7e-f017ad268c21@redhat.com> <4be08a33-8957-0494-857b-5c26869778b1@linaro.org> <148abea8-72ba-e474-c0ac-251a546717cf@linaro.org> From: Florian Weimer Message-ID: <94903f9e-87b3-6170-3efe-ee2ce04d336d@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2018 22:38:57 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <148abea8-72ba-e474-c0ac-251a546717cf@linaro.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 07/12/2018 10:30 PM, Adhemerval Zanella wrote: >> I'm concerned about this because in the future, we might compile the implementations to remove checks that are not needed for the C11 implementations. > > Why kind of scenario do you have in mind? Maybe use a more streamlined > internal implementation for C11 threads? Yes, the polymorphic mutex types must have *some* overhead (think of speculatively executing the wrong atomics), and less polymorphism should improve performance. Thanks, Florian