Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 14 Feb 2011 18:52:49 -0500 | From | Mathieu Desnoyers <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/2] jump label: 2.6.38 updates |
| |
* Mathieu Desnoyers (mathieu.desnoyers@polymtl.ca) wrote: > * David Miller (davem@davemloft.net) wrote: [...] > > We can't wholesale to atomic_t because we do this on variables of > > all sizes, not just 32-bit ones. > > > > We do them on pointers in the networking for example. > > We have atomic_long_t for this, but yeah, it would kind of suck to have > to create > > union { > atomic_long_t atomic; > void *ptr; > }
Actually, using a union for this is probably one of the worse idea I've had recently. Just casting the pointer to unsigned long and vice-versa, using atomic_long_*() ops would do the trick. But let's wait and see if it's really needed.
Thanks,
Mathieu
> > all around the place. Let's see if we can get to know which PowerPC > processor family all this fuss is about, and where this rumour > originates from. > > Thanks, > > Mathieu > > > -- > Mathieu Desnoyers > Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant > EfficiOS Inc. > http://www.efficios.com
-- Mathieu Desnoyers Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant EfficiOS Inc. http://www.efficios.com
| |