* Grant Grundler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> [davem: patch for you at the bottom to Documentation/atomic_ops.txt ]
>
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 02:38:35PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > * Grant Grundler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > > On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 07:50:18AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoye
From: Grant Grundler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 23:59:55 -0600
> [davem: patch for you at the bottom to Documentation/atomic_ops.txt ]
Looks fine to me.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More maj
[davem: patch for you at the bottom to Documentation/atomic_ops.txt ]
On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 02:38:35PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> * Grant Grundler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 07:50:18AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
...
> > > So I don't expect to come with an
* Grant Grundler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 07:50:18AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> ...
> > > A few questions/nits:
> > > o Did you attempt quantify how many places in the kernel could use this?
> > > I'm just trying to get a feel for how useful this really is vs ju
On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 07:50:18AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
...
> > A few questions/nits:
> > o Did you attempt quantify how many places in the kernel could use this?
> > I'm just trying to get a feel for how useful this really is vs just
> > using existing mechanisms (that people under
* Grant Grundler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 05:11:40PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> ...
> > > Can you add a description to Documentation/atomic_ops.txt ?
> > > *sigh* sorry for being "late to the party" on this one...
> >
> > Does Documentation/local_ops.txt answer y
On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 05:11:40PM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
...
> > Can you add a description to Documentation/atomic_ops.txt ?
> > *sigh* sorry for being "late to the party" on this one...
>
> Does Documentation/local_ops.txt answer your questions ? If not, please
> tell me and I'll gladly
From: Grant Grundler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 15:04:32 -0600
> Doesn't explain the difference between "local" and "non-local" either.
> Per CPU data should only need memory barriers (in some cases) and
> protection against interrupts (in probably more cases). So I'm not
> underst
* Grant Grundler ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 12, 2007 at 10:54:49AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> > Use the new generic cmpxchg_local (disables interrupt). Also use the generic
> > cmpxchg as fallback if SMP is not set.
>
> Mathieu,
> thanks for adding __cmpxchg_local to parisc...
On Sun, Aug 12, 2007 at 10:54:49AM -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> Use the new generic cmpxchg_local (disables interrupt). Also use the generic
> cmpxchg as fallback if SMP is not set.
Mathieu,
thanks for adding __cmpxchg_local to parisc but why do we need it?
By definition, atomic operator
10 matches
Mail list logo