From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Cc: "Linux Kernel Mailing List" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"Frédéric Weisbecker" <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
"Thomas Gleixner" <tglx@linutronix.de>,
"Peter Zijlstra" <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] atomic: Fix bugs in 'fetch_or()' and rename it to 'xchg_or()'
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2016 13:32:53 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160315123253.GA10152@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160315120147.GA9742@gmail.com>
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> wrote:
> But IMHO this really highlights a fundamental weakness of all this macro magic,
> it's all way too fragile.
>
> Why don't we introduce a boring family of APIs:
>
> cmpxchg_8()
> cmpxchg_16()
> cmpxchg_32()
> cmpxchg_64()
>
> xchg_or_32()
> xchg_or_64()
> ...
>
> ... with none of this pesky auto-typing property and none of the
> macro-inside-a-macro crap? We could do clean types and would write them all in
> proper C, not fragile CPP.
>
> It's not like we migrate between the types all that frequently - and even if we
> do, it's trivial.
>
> hm?
So if we are still on the same page at this point, we'd have to add a pointer
variant too I suspect:
cmpxchg_ptr()
xchg_ptr()
... whose bitness may differ between architectures(subarches), but it would still
be a single variant per architecture, i.e. still with pretty clear type
propagation and with a very clear notion of which architecture supports what.
It looks like a lot of work, but it's all low complexity work AFAICS that could be
partly automated.
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-03-15 12:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-03-14 12:32 [GIT PULL] NOHZ updates for v4.6 Ingo Molnar
2016-03-15 2:44 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-03-15 8:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-03-15 9:49 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-15 9:32 ` [PATCH] atomic: Fix bugs in 'fetch_or()' and rename it to 'xchg_or()' Ingo Molnar
2016-03-15 10:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-03-15 12:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-15 12:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-03-15 11:06 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-03-15 11:59 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-03-15 12:01 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-15 12:32 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2016-03-15 12:37 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-15 13:17 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-03-15 12:21 ` [PATCH v2] " Ingo Molnar
2016-03-15 13:26 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-03-16 8:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-16 8:29 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-03-15 17:08 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2016-03-16 8:14 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-17 0:54 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2016-03-15 16:18 ` [PATCH] " Linus Torvalds
2016-03-15 9:53 ` [PATCH] nohz: Change tick_dep_mask from 'unsigned long' to 'unsigned int' Ingo Molnar
2016-03-15 12:15 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-03-15 16:30 ` Linus Torvalds
2016-03-15 17:28 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2016-03-15 17:36 ` Linus Torvalds
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160315123253.GA10152@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.