On Sun, 13 May 2007, Nick Piggin wrote:
> On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 02:15:03PM +0100, Hugh Dickins wrote:
>
> > Hmm, well, I think that's fairly horrid, and would it even be
> > guaranteed to work on all architectures? Playing with one char
> > of an unsigned long in one way, while playing with the whole of
> > the unsigned long in another way (bitops) sounds very dodgy to me.
>
> Of course not, but they can just use a regular atomic word sized
> bitop. The problem with i386 is that its atomic ops also imply
> memory barriers that you obviously don't need on unlock.
But is it even a valid procedure on i386?
Hugh
-
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]
