Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 2 Jul 2018 11:55:26 -0700 | From | "Paul E. McKenney" <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH] docs: atomic_ops: atomic_set is a write (not read) operation |
| |
On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 03:43:45PM +0200, Andrea Parri wrote: > On Wed, Jun 06, 2018 at 01:07:56AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote: > > On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 09:43:23PM +0200, Jonathan Neuschäfer wrote: > > > Describe it as such. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jonathan Neuschäfer <j.neuschaefer@gmx.net> > > > > I have queued this, but if someone else would prefer to take it: > > > > Reviewed-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > In the commit message of bb7d47b697116c ("docs: atomic_ops: Describe > atomic_set as a write operation") from your dev branch, > > from "reads" to "writes"
Good catch, fixed, thank you!
Thanx, Paul
> Andrea > > > > > > > --- > > > Documentation/core-api/atomic_ops.rst | 2 +- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/Documentation/core-api/atomic_ops.rst b/Documentation/core-api/atomic_ops.rst > > > index 2e7165f86f55..724583453e1f 100644 > > > --- a/Documentation/core-api/atomic_ops.rst > > > +++ b/Documentation/core-api/atomic_ops.rst > > > @@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ updated by one CPU, local_t is probably more appropriate. Please see > > > local_t. > > > > > > The first operations to implement for atomic_t's are the initializers and > > > -plain reads. :: > > > +plain writes. :: > > > > > > #define ATOMIC_INIT(i) { (i) } > > > #define atomic_set(v, i) ((v)->counter = (i)) > > > -- > > > 2.17.1 > > > > > >
| |