[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20101024185208.6a7e0648.akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2010 18:52:08 -0700
From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com>
Cc: Mike Frysinger <vapier@...too.org>,
Luca Barbieri <luca@...a-barbieri.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] lib/atomic64_test: do not build on non-atomic64 systems
On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 09:20:34 -0700 Roland Dreier <rdreier@...co.com> wrote:
> > That's only part of the problem. The following won't build also:
>
> > drivers/infiniband/hw
>
> Interesting... I hadn't looked at that usage before. Both drivers that
> seem to use atomic64 already depend on 64BIT in Kconfig, so I suspect
> the intersection of 64BIT and !ATOMIC64 is empty?
>
> But eg drivers/infiniband/hw/qib/qib_rc.c does essentially:
>
> atomic64_t *maddr;
> u64 sdata = <something>
> ...
> maddr = (atomic64_t *) qp->r_sge.sge.vaddr;
> atomic64_add_return(sdata, maddr)
>
> is it legit to cast some random address to atomic64_t and expect it to
> work across archs that implement atomic64?
Not really. If someone implements atomic64 on 32-bit they may
do it by putting a spinlock in the atomic64_t. Or they might use
hashed spinlocks, in which case that'll work.
Probably hashed spinlocks, given the (realtively new) convention that
the all-zeroes pattern is a legit way of initialising an atomic_t.
--
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