From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: gang.chen@asianux.com (Chen Gang)
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 19:03:52 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] arm64: include: asm: atomic.h: use 'unsigned int'
 and 'atomic_t' instead of 'unsigned long' for atomic_clear_mask()
In-Reply-To: <20131010100733.GH3817@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com>
References: <52561137.3070608@asianux.com> <5256117A.4000009@asianux.com>
 <5256121A.9030504@asianux.com> <52561269.60900@asianux.com>
 <20131010100733.GH3817@mudshark.cambridge.arm.com>
Message-ID: <52568998.2080108@asianux.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 10/10/2013 06:07 PM, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 10, 2013 at 03:35:21AM +0100, Chen Gang wrote:
>> In current kernel wide source, for arm64, only s390 scsi drivers use
>> atomic_clear_mask(), now, s390 itself need use 'unsigned int' and
>> 'atomic_t', so need match s390's atomic_clear_mask().
>>
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chen Gang <gang.chen@asianux.com>
>> ---
>>  arch/arm64/include/asm/atomic.h |   13 +++++++------
>>  1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/arch/arm64/include/asm/atomic.h b/arch/arm64/include/asm/atomic.h
>> index 8363644..58808fc 100644
>> --- a/arch/arm64/include/asm/atomic.h
>> +++ b/arch/arm64/include/asm/atomic.h
>> @@ -126,16 +126,17 @@ static inline int atomic_cmpxchg(atomic_t *ptr, int old, int new)
>>  	return oldval;
>>  }
>>  
>> -static inline void atomic_clear_mask(unsigned long mask, unsigned long *addr)
>> +static inline void atomic_clear_mask(unsigned int mask, atomic_t *ptr)
>>  {
>> -	unsigned long tmp, tmp2;
>> +	unsigned int tmp;
> 
> Same comment here as for ARM; I think you want a signed int.
> 

OK, replied in patch 2/3 for ARM.

BTW: do arm64 need atomic_clear_mask()?


> Will
> 
> 

Thanks.
-- 
Chen Gang