[lkml]   [2007]   [Aug]   [15]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently across all architectures
    >>> Of course, if we find there are more callers in the kernel who want 
    >>> the
    >>> volatility behaviour than those who don't care, we can re-define the
    >>> existing ops to such variants, and re-name the existing definitions
    >>> to
    >>> somethine else, say "atomic_read_nonvolatile" for all I care.
    >> Do we really need another set of APIs?
    > Well, if there's one set of users who do care about volatile behaviour,
    > and another set that doesn't, it only sounds correct to provide both
    > those APIs, instead of forcing one behaviour on all users.

    But since there currently is only one such API, and there are
    users expecting the stronger behaviour, the only sane thing to
    do is let the API provide that behaviour. You can always add
    a new API with weaker behaviour later, and move users that are
    okay with it over to that new API.


    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: 2007-08-15 23:21    [W:0.034 / U:39.368 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site