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

    * Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> 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.)

    Ingo

    Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>

    --- 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 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 14:09    [W:0.030 / U:0.112 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site