On Wed, 6 Dec 2006, Matthew Wilcox wrote: > To be honest, it'd be much easier if we only defined these operations on > atomic_t's. We have all the infrastructure in place for them, and > they're fairly well understood. If you need different sizes, I'm OK > with an atomic_pointer_t, or whatever.
An pointer is probably one of the most important entities to use with cmpxchg (aside from the ints and longs that we already support). A pointer can be defined to point to any other type. So we would need atomic_pointer_t(<type_pointed_to>)? - 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/
