From: Nick Piggin <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 19:23:58 +1000
> David Howells wrote:
> > Nick Piggin <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > | int atomic_inc_and_test(atomic_t *v);
> > | int atomic_dec_and_test(atomic_t *v);
> > |
> > | These two routines increment and decrement by 1, respectively, the
> > | given atomic counter. They return a boolean indicating whether the
> > | resulting counter value was zero or not.
> > |
> > | It requires explicit memory barrier semantics around the operation as
> > | above.
> >
> > Note the last paragraph. "It requires" should be "They require", but the
> > sense would seem to be obvious. However, it's not clear on a second reading
> > as to whether this is an instruction to the _caller_ or an instruction to the
> > arch _implementer_.
> >
>
> Yes, I remember Dave M clarified this sometime ago (on lkml I guess). It
> is a little confusing, but I think the wording is for the implementer's
> point of view. Dave will pull me up if I'm wrong...
Any routine which returns state must have the barriers in the arch
implementation. These two routines returns state.
-
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/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]