Thread (72 messages) 72 messages, 24 authors, 2006-02-03

Re: [PATCH 1/12] generic *_bit()

From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@infradead.org>
Date: 2006-02-01 18:02:43

On Wed, Feb 01, 2006 at 07:11:34AM -0800, Chen, Kenneth W wrote:
Akinobu Mita wrote on Wednesday, January 25, 2006 7:29 PM
quoted
This patch introduces the C-language equivalents of the functions below:

- atomic operation:
void set_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr);
void clear_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr);
void change_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr);
int test_and_set_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr);
int test_and_clear_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr);
int test_and_change_bit(int nr, volatile unsigned long *addr);
I wonder why you did not make these functions take volatile
unsigned int * address argument?
Because they are defined to operate on arrays of unsigned long
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help