On Mon, Jul 15, 2013 at 10:28 AM, Geert Uytterhoeven
<ge...@linux-m68k.org> wrote:
>
> but the first one is non-trivial: using xchg() on atomic_t is a bit gross...
It's also broken. There's no guarantee that an "atomic_t" is just a
value. Now, the old sparc32 stuff (which hid lock bits in atomic_t)
may be gone, but it's still the case that atomic_t may not actually
work with xchg.
(In *practice* it works on normal architectures, so I'm not saying
that we don't have it, but it's a bug if we do).
There are "atomic_xchg()" and "atomic_xchg64()" functions that are supported.
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
