[lkml]   [1998]   [May]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: test_and_set_bit() not atomic forever? [cli/sti in char/vt.c [patch]]
    On Sat, 30 May 1998, Andrew Derrick Balsa wrote:

    > Hi Andrea,
    > Andrea Arcangeli wrote:
    > >
    > > On Fri, 29 May 1998, Pavel Machek wrote:
    > >
    > > At first I can see test_and_set_bit() very more helpful if
    > > implemented atomic.
    > Correct. Otherwise it makes no sense at all to define a function for it!
    > :-)
    > >

    Will it be to much trouble to define in atomic.h something like
    atomic_test_and_set_bit(). Possibly shortening the name ;) On the x86
    it'll be just a wrapper that works on atomic_t. Other archs. can
    implement it as required.

    This way if we want a guaranteed atomic test_and_set on any architecture
    we can use the above without second thoughts (and without arguments in
    linux-kernel ;))



    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:42    [W:0.017 / U:8.364 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site