[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <46BCF19E.5000702@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 19:15:42 -0400
From: Chris Snook <csnook@...hat.com>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC: "Luck, Tony" <tony.luck@...el.com>,
Andreas Schwab <schwab@...e.de>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, ak@...e.de, heiko.carstens@...ibm.com,
davem@...emloft.net, schwidefsky@...ibm.com, wensong@...ux-vs.org,
horms@...ge.net.au, wjiang@...ilience.com, cfriesen@...tel.com,
zlynx@....org, rpjday@...dspring.com, jesper.juhl@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/24] make atomic_read() behave consistently on ia64
Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007, Luck, Tony wrote:
>> Here are the functions in which they occur in the object file. You
>> may have to chase down some inlining to find the function that
>> actually uses atomic_*().
>
> Could you just make the "atomic_read()" and "atomic_set()" functions be
> inline functions instead?
>
> That way you get nice compiler warnings when you pass the wrong kind of
> object around. So
>
> static void atomic_set(atomic_t *p, int value)
> {
> *(volatile int *)&p->value = value;
> }
>
> static int atomic_read(atomic_t *p)
> {
> return *(volatile int *)&p->value;
> }
>
> etc...
I'll do this for the whole patchset. Stay tuned for the resubmit.
-- Chris
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists