lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2002]   [Aug]   [28]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: atomic64_t proposal
Date
Followup to:  <Pine.LNX.4.44.0208281040010.14946-100000@rmholt.homeip.net>
By author: Robin Holt <holt@rmholt.homeip.net>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> I do like the atomic_inc, atomic_dec, etc being able to handle either
> type. While producing code, I can do a simple check at the beginning of
> the block and define the appropriate type for a particular architecture.
>

Great. How do you expect to implement atomic_inc() et al so that that
can actually be done? Consider that atomic64_t may very well need
full-blown spinlocks, whereas a 32-bit atomic_t may not.

-hpa
--
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt <amsp@zytor.com>
-
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: 2005-03-22 13:28    [W:0.027 / U:2.320 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site