[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CACVXFVNQvwHvJcSzqKv27MH_RgM=e0VvXkLPKCB0i3=Z9_9EXg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 09:34:17 +0800
From: Ming Lei <tom.leiming@...il.com>
To: Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Are there u32 atomic bitops? (or dealing w/ i_flags)
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 9:10 AM, Andy Lutomirski <luto@...capital.net> wrote:
> I want to change inode->i_flags access to be atomic -- there are some
> locking oddities right now, I think, and I want to use a new inode
> flag to signal mtime updates from page_mkwrite. The problem is that
> i_flags is an unsigned int, and making it an unsigned long seems like
> a waste, but there aren't any u32 atomic bitops.
See below in include/linux/types.h
typedef struct {
int counter;
} atomic_t;
#ifdef CONFIG_64BIT
typedef struct {
long counter;
} atomic64_t;
#endif
Thanks,
--
Ming Lei
--
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