Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 30 May 1998 21:38:01 -0500 (EST) | From | "Rafael R. Reilova" <> | Subject | Re: 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 ;))
Cheers,
Rafael
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
| |