Re: atomic64_t proposal

["H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>]

Followup to:  <Pine.LNX.4.44.0208281040010.14946-100000@rmholt.homeip.net>
By author:    Robin Holt <holt@rmholt.homeip.net>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> 
> I do like the atomic_inc, atomic_dec, etc being able to handle either 
> type.  While producing code, I can do a simple check at the beginning of 
> the block and define the appropriate type for a particular architecture.
> 

Great.  How do you expect to implement atomic_inc() et al so that that
can actually be done?  Consider that atomic64_t may very well need
full-blown spinlocks, whereas a 32-bit atomic_t may not.

	-hpa
-- 
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt	<amsp@zytor.com>