On Wed, 6 Dec 2006, David Howells wrote:
> 
> Implement generic UP cmpxchg() where an arch doesn't otherwise support it.
> This assuming that the arch doesn't have support SMP without providing its own
> cmpxchg() implementation.

This is too ugly to live. At least the kernel/workqueue.c part.

The requirement that everybody implement a workable cmpxchg (and falling 
back to spinlocks if required as per the atomic bit operations) looks ok, 
but don't show that in generic code.

                Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to