-
- Downloads
Get rid of the SpinLockAcquire/SpinLockAcquire_NoHoldoff distinction
in favor of having just one set of macros that don't do HOLD/RESUME_INTERRUPTS (hence, these correspond to the old SpinLockAcquire_NoHoldoff case). Given our coding rules for spinlock use, there is no reason to allow CHECK_FOR_INTERRUPTS to be done while holding a spinlock, and also there is no situation where ImmediateInterruptOK will be true while holding a spinlock. Therefore doing HOLD/RESUME_INTERRUPTS while taking/releasing a spinlock is just a waste of cycles. Qingqing Zhou and Tom Lane.
Showing
- src/backend/access/transam/xlog.c 15 additions, 15 deletionssrc/backend/access/transam/xlog.c
- src/backend/storage/buffer/bufmgr.c 36 additions, 48 deletionssrc/backend/storage/buffer/bufmgr.c
- src/backend/storage/ipc/shmem.c 2 additions, 1 deletionsrc/backend/storage/ipc/shmem.c
- src/backend/storage/lmgr/lwlock.c 10 additions, 9 deletionssrc/backend/storage/lmgr/lwlock.c
- src/include/storage/buf_internals.h 6 additions, 14 deletionssrc/include/storage/buf_internals.h
- src/include/storage/spin.h 11 additions, 25 deletionssrc/include/storage/spin.h
Loading
Please register or sign in to comment