[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1403805649-9830-1-git-send-email-bobby.prani@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 11:00:49 -0700
From: Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@...il.com>
To: trivial@...nel.org, jkosina@...e.cz,
Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org (open list:DOCUMENTATION),
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org (open list)
Subject: [PATCH 1/1] doc: atomic-ops.txt: correct return value info about atomic_add_unless
Signed-off-by: Pranith Kumar <bobby.prani@...il.com>
---
Documentation/atomic_ops.txt | 9 +++------
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/atomic_ops.txt b/Documentation/atomic_ops.txt
index 68542fe..d3ad657 100644
--- a/Documentation/atomic_ops.txt
+++ b/Documentation/atomic_ops.txt
@@ -271,16 +271,13 @@ Finally:
int atomic_add_unless(atomic_t *v, int a, int u);
-If the atomic value v is not equal to u, this function adds a to v, and
-returns non zero. If v is equal to u then it returns zero. This is done as
-an atomic operation.
+If the atomic value v is not equal to u, this function adds a to v.
+It returns the old value of v. It is done as an atomic operation.
-atomic_add_unless requires explicit memory barriers around the operation
-unless it fails (returns 0).
+atomic_add_unless requires explicit memory barriers around the operation.
atomic_inc_not_zero, equivalent to atomic_add_unless(v, 1, 0)
-
If a caller requires memory barrier semantics around an atomic_t
operation which does not return a value, a set of interfaces are
defined which accomplish this:
--
1.9.1
--
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