[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1414533617-25933-4-git-send-email-paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 15:00:16 -0700
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, laijs@...fujitsu.com, dipankar@...ibm.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com,
josh@...htriplett.org, tglx@...utronix.de, peterz@...radead.org,
rostedt@...dmis.org, dhowells@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
dvhart@...ux.intel.com, fweisbec@...il.com, oleg@...hat.com,
bobby.prani@...il.com,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: [PATCH tip/core/rcu 4/5] documentation: Add atomic_long_t to atomic_ops.txt
From: "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
---
Documentation/atomic_ops.txt | 12 ++++++++----
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git a/Documentation/atomic_ops.txt b/Documentation/atomic_ops.txt
index 68542fe13b85..183e41bdcb69 100644
--- a/Documentation/atomic_ops.txt
+++ b/Documentation/atomic_ops.txt
@@ -7,12 +7,13 @@
maintainers on how to implement atomic counter, bitops, and spinlock
interfaces properly.
- The atomic_t type should be defined as a signed integer.
-Also, it should be made opaque such that any kind of cast to a normal
-C integer type will fail. Something like the following should
-suffice:
+ The atomic_t type should be defined as a signed integer and
+the atomic_long_t type as a signed long integer. Also, they should
+be made opaque such that any kind of cast to a normal C integer type
+will fail. Something like the following should suffice:
typedef struct { int counter; } atomic_t;
+ typedef struct { long counter; } atomic_long_t;
Historically, counter has been declared volatile. This is now discouraged.
See Documentation/volatile-considered-harmful.txt for the complete rationale.
@@ -37,6 +38,9 @@ initializer is used before runtime. If the initializer is used at runtime, a
proper implicit or explicit read memory barrier is needed before reading the
value with atomic_read from another thread.
+As with all of the atomic_ interfaces, replace the leading "atomic_"
+with "atomic_long_" to operate on atomic_long_t.
+
The second interface can be used at runtime, as in:
struct foo { atomic_t counter; };
--
1.8.1.5
--
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