Thank you for the reviews. Series applied with an incremental shown below,
Jarno
On Jun 2, 2014, at 9:24 PM, YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamam...@valinux.co.jp> wrote:
>> ovsrcu_set() and ovsrcu_init() look like functions, so users are
>> justified in expecting the arguments to be evalueated before any of
>
> evaluated
>
Thanks.
>>
>> +#define ovsrcu_set__(VAR, VALUE, ORDER) \
>> + ({ \
>> + typeof(VAR) var__ = (VAR); \
>> + typeof(VALUE) value__ = (VALUE); \
>> + memory_order order__ = (ORDER); \
>> + \
>> + atomic_store_explicit(&var__->p, value__, order__); \
>
> ovs-atomic-gcc4+ version of atomic_store_explicit also has
> a variable named order__. is it safe?
>
Good catch, applied with the following incremental:
diff --git a/lib/ovs-rcu.h b/lib/ovs-rcu.h
index e27dfad..87651d8 100644
--- a/lib/ovs-rcu.h
+++ b/lib/ovs-rcu.h
@@ -136,14 +136,14 @@
* any of the body of the atomic_store_explicit. Since the type of
* 'VAR' is not fixed, we cannot use an inline function to get
* function semantics for this. */
-#define ovsrcu_set__(VAR, VALUE, ORDER) \
- ({ \
- typeof(VAR) var__ = (VAR); \
- typeof(VALUE) value__ = (VALUE); \
- memory_order order__ = (ORDER); \
- \
- atomic_store_explicit(&var__->p, value__, order__); \
- (void *) 0; \
+#define ovsrcu_set__(VAR, VALUE, ORDER) \
+ ({ \
+ typeof(VAR) ovsrcu_var = (VAR); \
+ typeof(VALUE) ovsrcu_value = (VALUE); \
+ memory_order ovsrcu_order = (ORDER); \
+ \
+ atomic_store_explicit(&ovsrcu_var->p, ovsrcu_value, ovsrcu_order); \
+ (void *) 0; \
})
#else /* not GNU C */
struct ovsrcu_pointer { ATOMIC(void *) p; };
> otherwise,
> Acked-by: YAMAMOTO Takashi <yamam...@valinux.co.jp>
>
> YAMAMOTO Takashi
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
dev@openvswitch.org
http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
