whether we seem to be running in a uniprocessor or multiprocessor.
The adjustment rules could probably still use further tweaking, but
I'm convinced this should be a win overall.
Also performed an initial run through of upgrading our Copyright date to
extend to 2005 ... first run here was very simple ... change everything
where: grep 1996-2004 && the word 'Copyright' ... scanned through the
generated list with 'less' first, and after, to make sure that I only
picked up the right entries ...
to reference the spinlock variable, and specify "memory" as a clobber
operand to be sure gcc does not try to keep shared-memory values in
registers across a spinlock acquisition. Also tighten the S/390 asm
sequence, which was apparently written with only minimal study of the
gcc asm documentation. I have personally tested i386, ia64, ppc, hppa,
and s390 variants --- there is some small chance that I broke the others,
but I doubt it.
instruction in the s_lock() wait loop, and use test before test-and-set
in TAS() macro to avoid unnecessary bus traffic. Patch from Manfred
Spraul, reworked a bit by Tom.
that were broken, try to make layout of s_lock.h entries consistent,
use HAVE_SPINLOCKS in preference to HAS_TEST_AND_SET everywhere outside
s_lock.h itself.
that OS=hpux is the same as CPU=hppa. First steps at doing this.
With these patches, we still work on hppa with either gcc or HP's cc.
We might work on hpux/itanium with gcc, but I can't test it. Definitely
will not work on hpux/itanium with non-gcc compiler, for lack of spinlock
code.
>
> ... he is now about to write an inlined version that can go into
> s_lock.h . I'll send the new patch later on...
OK, here it comes:
An inlined version of tas(), that works for both, powerpc and
powerpc64. The patch is against 7.3b5 and passes the test suite on
both architectures.
Reinhard Max
during the regression test. The problem has been reproduced on two machine
but both of these are the same type of hardware and software. I also tried
to recreate the problem on other machines, on older version of AIX but I
couldn't.
After looked through pgsql-hackers mailing list, I focused on spin lock
issue to solve the problem. The easiest and may not be the best solution
for the problem is to give up HAS_TEST_AND_SET. This actually works.
One another and better solution for the problem is to use _check_lock() and
_clear_lock() as spin lock. Important thing here is to define S_UNLOCK()
with _clear_lock(). This will solve the so called "Compiler bug" issue
someone wrote on the mailing list.
We have some other API such as cs(), compare_and_swap() and fetch_and_or()
to do test and set on AIX, but any of these didn't solve my problem. I
wrote tiny testing program to see if we have any bug of these API of AIX,
but I couldn't see any problem except for compare_and_swap(). It seems that
you can not use compare_and_swap() for the purpose, as it would not work as
spin lock on any SMP machines I tested. I don't know the reason why cs()
nor fetch_and_or()/fetch_and_and() will not work with PostgreSQL on p690.
These worked with my testing program on all machines I tested.
Tomoyuki Niijima
As proof of concept, provide an alternate implementation based on POSIX
semaphores. Also push the SysV shared-memory implementation into a
separate file so that it can be replaced conveniently.
