linux-kernel - Re: Are there u32 atomic bitops? (or dealing w/ i

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

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/