lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Mar]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [more markup]  [less markup]  [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From"Chen, Kenneth W" <>
SubjectRE: Fix unlock_buffer() to work the same way as bit_unlock()
DateTue, 28 Mar 2006 22:46:22 -0800
Nick Piggin wrote on Tuesday, March 28, 2006 6:36 PM
> Hmm, not sure. Maybe a few new bitops with _lock / _unlock postfixes?
> For page lock and buffer lock we'd just need test_and_set_bit_lock,
> clear_bit_unlock, smp_mb__after_clear_bit_unlock.> > I don't know, _for_lock might be a better name. But it's getting long.

I think kernel needs all 4 variants:

clear_bit
clear_bit_lock
clear_bit_unlock
clear_bit_fence

And the variant need to permutated on all other bit ops ...  I think it
would be indeed a better API and be more explicit about the ordering.

- Ken
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-03-29 08:48    [from the cache]
©2003-2008