Faster mutex lock() and unlock()

[Marcus Brinkmann]

At Mon, 10 Jul 2006 14:57:38 +0200 (CEST),
haypo at inl.fr wrote:
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I would like to know your opinion about replacing old ath_mutex_lock() with:

I don't think so :)

We really want static initialization.  Furthermore, this would
constitute an API break, which is not acceptable.  Look, I think you
are over-engineering.  Do you have the profiling data to illustrate
that your proposed changes have any measurable impact in your
application?

Yes, there is a small overhead.  The overhead is a lock instruction.
That's significant, but ath was not written for performance, but for
flexibility.  If you really need that extra-edge, then you will have
to use a customized solution.

Thanks,
Marcus