From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andy Shevchenko Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] bitops: define gen_test_bit() the same way as the rest of functions Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2022 19:28:08 +0300 Message-ID: References: <20220606114908.962562-1-alexandr.lobakin@intel.com> <20220606114908.962562-4-alexandr.lobakin@intel.com> <20220607155722.44040-1-alexandr.lobakin@intel.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Return-path: DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1654619298; x=1686155298; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=ExbyLBBVlB99JJjQlhxs6g9MkUreWgPpOBU5Q2moeO4=; b=O9YzUUrgNny0g1n/fjKkK7nD8ghcJD67N3bjISH/S5QHPhJkUCMX98vA xThtctH/e5rbnsRCWnoo8cF/FRfHv40Iju/Jop7XzgfBOplV5taafuBlh UwD05gjOcWsLrj4Zp6Mcx25Y8yoje7yzykrdyBH4QAjL+iWnP6aGSzHuO RNimX/+NJ4cGpoMKlCFQ5V+U2chylJJ2Q2concdccOtSdmrdiUq8xbG2C 0sCHohRIGAUoz56vI/y/oHNJ8OeHuR7hNxPt2uITCWE9vhdieEe3vPibu UR411XX79ymUXMpxwfFIGBEaP9mXcxW6xLlN8NGxgUygEUFfvGj6ZM5j5 g==; Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220607155722.44040-1-alexandr.lobakin@intel.com> List-ID: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Alexander Lobakin Cc: Marco Elver , Arnd Bergmann , Yury Norov , Richard Henderson , Matt Turner , Brian Cain , Geert Uytterhoeven , Yoshinori Sato , Rich Felker , "David S. Miller" , Kees Cook , "Peter Zijlstra (Intel)" , Borislav Petkov , Tony Luck , Greg Kroah-Hartman , linux-alpha@vger.kernel.org, linux-hexagon@vger.kernel.org, linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-m68k@lists.linux-m68k.org, linux-sh@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, linux-ke On Tue, Jun 07, 2022 at 05:57:22PM +0200, Alexander Lobakin wrote: > From: Marco Elver > Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2022 15:43:49 +0200 > > On Mon, Jun 06, 2022 at 01:49PM +0200, Alexander Lobakin wrote: ... > > I would also propose adding a comment close to the deref that test_bit() > > is atomic and the deref needs to remain volatile, so future people will > > not try to do the same optimization. > > I think that's also the reason why it's not underscored, right? Non-__ prefixed bitops are atomic, __ non-atomic. -- With Best Regards, Andy Shevchenko