[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:0.088 / U:7.288 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site