Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] WorkStruct: Use direct assignment rather than cmpxchg() | From | Benjamin Herrenschmidt <> | Date | Sun, 10 Dec 2006 09:19:36 +1100 |
| |
> The problem is where we end up tangling with test_and_set_bit() emulated > using spinlocks, and even then it's not a problem _provided_ > test_and_set_bit() doesn't attempt to modify the word if the bit was > set.
I'm not 100% sure what is the problem there, but beware that bitops don't provide the same semantics as spinlocks regarding memory ordering.
Ben.
- 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/
| |