[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <55A00251.8020405@ezchip.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 13:35:13 -0400
From: Chris Metcalf <cmetcalf@...hip.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>
CC: Geert Uytterhoeven <geert@...ux-m68k.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux-Arch <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>,
Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>,
Vineet Gupta <vgupta@...opsys.com>,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
HÃ¥vard Skinnemoen <hskinnemoen@...il.com>,
Miao Steven <realmz6@...il.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>,
Richard Kuo <rkuo@...eaurora.org>,
Tony Luck <tony.luck@...el.com>,
James Hogan <james.hogan@...tec.com>,
Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <jejb@...isc-linux.org>,
Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@...nel.crashing.org>,
Heiko Carstens <heiko.carstens@...ibm.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 23/24] atomic: Collapse all atomic_{set,clear}_mask
definitions
On 07/10/2015 12:27 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 02:42:56PM +0100, Russell King - ARM Linux wrote:
>> The obvious question though is whether we have an established name for this
>> operation elsewhere in the kernel, and whether we should have consistency.
> Consistency is good.
>
>> In include/linux, we already have (grepping for 'and_*not'):
>>
>> include/linux/nodemask.h:#define nodes_andnot(dst, src1, src2) \
>> include/linux/bitmap.h:extern int __bitmap_andnot(unsigned long *dst, const unsigned long *bitmap1,
>> include/linux/cpumask.h:static inline int cpumask_andnot(struct cpumask *dstp,
>>
>> We also have:
>>
>> include/linux/signal.h:#define _sig_andn(x,y) ((x) & ~(y))
>>
>> which seems to be the only instance of "andn" in include/.
> How about I rename the _sig_andn one to _sig_andnot, and go with
> atomic_andnot, to match the *mask functions.
I'll respin my patch to just tweak tilepro's "andn" to use
"andnot" as well while I'm at it, then. Making "andnot" a stand-alone
patch would cause conflicts so it might as well go in with your change.
--
Chris Metcalf, EZChip Semiconductor
http://www.ezchip.com
--
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