lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2004]   [May]   [22]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: 2.6.6-mm5
    From
    Date
        Andrew> I don't think we can expect all architectures to be able
    Andrew> to implement atomic 64-bit IO's, can we?

    Andrew> ergo, drivers which want to use readq and writeq should
    Andrew> provide the appropriate locking.

    Perhaps we should have ARCH_HAS_ATOMIC_WRITEQ or something so that
    drivers don't add the overhead of locking on architectures where it's
    not necessary?

    (I happen to be working on a driver that needs atomic 64-bit writes,
    and where those writes happen to be in the fast path)

    Thanks,
    Roland
    -
    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 14:03    [W:0.022 / U:5.808 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site