Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2018 11:42:14 +0300 From: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> To: Matthew Macy <mmacy@freebsd.org> Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian.chadd@gmail.com>, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>, "br@freebsd.org" <br@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, marius@freebsd.org Subject: Re: atomic_testandclear_<type>, atomic_testandset_<type> Message-ID: <20180624084214.GW2430@kib.kiev.ua> In-Reply-To: <CAPrugNoNjcRqhhOCwVpcTLy2YrxnLhjobSKx8B0mDxNU7AM-=g@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAPrugNpff58zQa-Dzpqp%2BrO8KeP0o=nEELLnVLiYRmmV%2BQqgZg@mail.gmail.com> <CAPrugNoNjcRqhhOCwVpcTLy2YrxnLhjobSKx8B0mDxNU7AM-=g@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 01:38:07PM -0700, Matthew Macy wrote: > It turns out ck already has equivalent primitives. Pardon the noise. Why not to add trivial cmpset-based implementations to the lacking arches ? If maintainers prefer proper ll/cs assembly, they would have the time to do it properly without ultimatum. It is useful to utilize consistent atomic(9) KPI across kernel. > > -M > > On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 12:18 Matthew Macy <mmacy@freebsd.org> wrote: > > > The functions in the subject are both documented in atomic(9) and are > > implemented by every arch except sparc64 and MIPS. I have some code in > > review that uses them that I intend to commit once the various design > > issues are addressed. Please implement them so that those targets can > > remain part of universe. > > > > Thanks in advance. > > -M > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20180624084214.GW2430>