Re: [PATCH 3/6] C-language equivalents of include/asm-*/bitops.h

Hirokazu Takata <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.linux.ports.ultrapenguin,gmane.linux.kernel,gmane.linux.ports.ia64,gmane.linux.ports.hppa,gmane.linux.ports.ppc.devel,gmane.linux.ports.sh.devel,gmane.linux.ports.sparc
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Hello Mita-san, and folks,

From: [email protected] (Akinobu Mita)
Subject: [PATCH 3/6] C-language equivalents of include/asm-*/bitops.h
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:32:06 +0900
> o generic {,test_and_}{set,clear,change}_bit() (atomic bitops)
> 
> This patch introduces the C-language equivalents of the functions below:
> void set_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr);
> void clear_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr);
...
> int test_and_change_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr);
> 
> HAVE_ARCH_ATOMIC_BITOPS is defined when the architecture has its own
> version of these functions.
> 
> This code largely copied from:
> include/asm-powerpc/bitops.h
> include/asm-parisc/bitops.h
> include/asm-parisc/atomic.h

Could you tell me more about the new generic {set,clear,test}_bit()
routines?

Why do you copied these routines from parisc and employed them
 as generic ones?
I'm not sure whether these generic {set,clear,test}_bit() routines
are really generic or not.

> +/* Can't use raw_spin_lock_irq because of #include problems, so
> + * this is the substitute */
> +#define _atomic_spin_lock_irqsave(l,f) do {	\
> +	raw_spinlock_t *s = ATOMIC_HASH(l);	\
> +	local_irq_save(f);			\
> +	__raw_spin_lock(s);			\
> +} while(0)
> +
> +#define _atomic_spin_unlock_irqrestore(l,f) do {	\
> +	raw_spinlock_t *s = ATOMIC_HASH(l);		\
> +	__raw_spin_unlock(s);				\
> +	local_irq_restore(f);				\
> +} while(0)

Is there a possibility that these routines affect for archs
with no HAVE_ARCH_ATOMIC_BITOPS for SMP ?
I think __raw_spin_lock() is sufficient and local_irqsave() is 
not necessary in general atomic routines.

If the parisc's LDCW instruction required disabling interrupts,
it would be parisc specific and not generic case, I think, 
although I'm not familier with the parisc architecture...

-- Takata
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe ultralinux" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.