On Fri, 2015-04-17 at 13:32 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Thu, 2015-04-16 at 16:28 +0100, Jan Beulich wrote:
> > >>> On 10.04.15 at 16:19, <david.vra...@citrix.com> wrote:
> > > +#define xadd(ptr, v) generic_xaddl((ptr), (v))
> >
> > I think it is at least confusing to call the thing xadd (looking to be
> > size generic) and then expand to generic_xaddl (only supporting
> > 32-bit operations), yet subsequently implementing a size-generic
> > xadd() for x86.
>
> Indeed, and I went to build on arm32 prior to hacking up a proper xadd
> and:
Slightly more surprisingly I also see something similar on arm64:
spinlock.c: In function ‘_spin_lock’:
spinlock.c:145:5: error: passing argument 1 of ‘generic_xaddl’ from
incompatible pointer type [-Werror]
tickets.head_tail = xadd(&lock->tickets, tickets.head_tail);
^
spinlock.c:15:12: note: expected ‘volatile u32 *’ but argument is of
type ‘union spinlock_tickets_t *’
static u32 generic_xaddl(volatile u32 *ptr, u32 v)
^
> (I hope to knock up the arm asm version in the next hour or so, so you
> may not care...)
ditto.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
