[lkml]   [2005]   [Jan]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
SubjectRe: [patch 1/3] spinlock fix #1, *_can_lock() primitives

* Linus Torvalds <> wrote:

> I can do ppc64 myself, can others fix the other architectures (Ingo,
> shouldn't the UP case have the read/write_can_lock() cases too? And
> wouldn't you agree that it makes more sense to have the rwlock test
> variants in asm/rwlock.h?):

You are right about UP, and the patch below adds the UP variants. It's
analogous to the existing wrapping concept that UP 'spinlocks' are
always unlocked on UP. (spin_can_lock() is already properly defined on
UP too.)


Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <>

--- linux/include/linux/spinlock.h.orig
+++ linux/include/linux/spinlock.h
@@ -228,6 +228,9 @@ typedef struct {

#define rwlock_yield(lock) (void)(lock)

+#define read_can_lock(lock) (((void)(lock), 1))
+#define write_can_lock(lock) (((void)(lock), 1))
#define _spin_trylock(lock) ({preempt_disable(); _raw_spin_trylock(lock) ? \
1 : ({preempt_enable(); 0;});})

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 14:09    [W:0.082 / U:4.032 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site